Talk:Giants: Citizen Kabuto

The original game?

"It was based on the original PC game by Planet Moon Studios."
Which original game? I only played Giants a few times myself, so I'm not very knowledgable about it in general, and I always thought it was an original. Anyway, somebody that does know should add a link to the other game's Wiki page. Retodon8 08:43, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

No clue what that is about - GCK is a stand-alone game. While the developers made no attempt to hide their desire to create a sequal, nothing came of it. Changed the first paragraph to reflect this, and to correct the "MS-DOS" statements. Also went ahead and changed the developer entry to point to Planet Moon Studios. If memory serves correctly, Digital Mayhem developed the PS2 version, rather than the original PC version. I could very well be wrong though, so feel free to call me on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.214.84.1 (talk • contribs)

Macintosh version

I see no info on the Mac release date. It must have been 2001 or later, as Mac OS X was retailed in said year. Scepia 21:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Save games?

I don't supose there were ever any user-made patches that allowed in-game saves? There's certainly none mentioned in the artical, but I'm sure I remember hearing about one years ago. Either way, I'm afraid I haven't found one yet.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.105.191.128 (talk • contribs)

There might be in the Macintosh version, but not the PC version. If it is indeed available in the MacOS version of the game, I highly doubt it is a result of a user created patch as the Mac Giants community is extremely decentralized and never really 'took off' to the same extent that the PC version's community did. I should note that I went ahead and pulled a rather major edit - Someone previously noted that the Mac and PC versions of the game worked together over the internet but this is entirely untrue due to the fact that the PC version utilizes DirectX for it's netcode which is not available on the MacOS. I also added a fairly long segment regarding the strives that the community has taken to mod the game.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.154.132 (talk • contribs)

Creative bundling

Anyone want to write up about the agreement to distribute with I think it was Creative Audigy cards (or it could have been Creative 3D cards - Gefore 4). I know I got my copy free with either mu Audigy or Creative Geforce 4 Ti4400. Would link to being a commercial success. Lonyo 00:21, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Kabuto's Weak Spot

I'm kinda hesistant on whether to add it. I find it quite notable though for being unique from your average headshot. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 147.144.1.251 (talk) 22:41, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

External Link

http://www.giantswd.org/ This link has very current news for giants, they are keeping uptodate patches on hand, and developing further. It seems more important to than most of the current links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.49.120.147 (talk) 21:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

All external links have to comply with WP:EL. The presented site is a fansite with guides, and tutorials on the games. As far as I can tell, it does not host software which would violate copyrights. It hosts/links to all the prominent mods for the game (though not notable by Wiki-policies, hence best left out of the article), graphical comparisons between the GeForce3/2 versions, and such. I would say it can contribute to the article with information which cannot be in the article due to policies, so it qualifies as a worthy external link. If no one objects, I second we put up Giants World Domination in the External links section. Jappalang (talk) 00:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Support. --Bryan H Bell (talk) 01:26, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Going to have to express some degree of confusion here - above user (Jappalang) states that GiantsWD would be a moderately valuable link to include - should nobody offer any objections - in the external links section, but then when nearly three weeks have gone by with no such objection, removes the link once it has been added, and states that the link is not compliant with Wikipedia's external links policy? Now, I'll be the first to admit - quite readily, I might add - that I'm not all that particularly familiar with Wikipedia's guidelines and such... but that just seems a bit odd...

...at any rate, I have to echo my fellow unregistered user above - at this point in Citizen Kabuto's life, GWD is pretty much the only general purpose resource site for the game - and to the best of my knowledge doesn't host anything that is particularly unsavory or otherwise questionable... but again, I will admit to being a Wikinoob. :P 76.105.246.89 (talk) 06:03, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

2008 Rewrite

Hi, I will be rewriting this entire article soon. I will be making major changes to befit Wikipedia and Wikiproject Video Games (WP:VG/GL) standards. The structure will be:

• Lead
• Gameplay
• Plot and settings
  • Characters
  • Story
• Development
• Reception
• References
• External links

Besides accordance with standard Wiki guidelines, the revised article will:

• be neutral in point of view WP:NPOV
• have verifiable sources WP:VERIFY WP:VG/S
• have contents that are mostly notable WP:NOTABLE
• not be a game guide as per WP:NOT#GUIDE
• not be an article entirely based on in-universe information without real world relevances WP:GAMECRUFT
• not be just lists of features and links WP:NOT#DIRECTORY
• not a compilation of indiscriminate information WP:NOT#IINFO
• not have materials which are of original research WP:OR

The aim is to achieve at least a B-grade article dealing with Giants: Citizen Kabuto the computer game, and not an in-depth in-universe look at the game's contents. Jappalang (talk) 14:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

 Done Rewrite is done. Comments and critiques to improve the article abiding the guidelines are welcome. Jappalang (talk) 07:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice job, Jappalang! You added quite a bit of new material without discarding valuable earlier material. This article should be much more useful to Wikipedia's users now. -- Bryan H Bell (talk) 22:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I have requested Wikiproject: Video games to assess the article. Hoping to get further comments and critiques from them too. Jappalang (talk) 08:46, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:VG Assessment

Two (!) editors proposed A-class, and I think this article certainly is, barring a single thing I find lacking in comprehensiveness. This is the confusion between races and characters, specifically, two of the three title characters are discussed as "race", while the third is only referred to as "character". Perhaps the structure of this section can be cleared up a bit? User:Krator (t c) 22:23, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I have added the statement on him being the only one of his race left in the Characters section, and changed the lead to refer to characters instead of race. Does this give a clearer picture? Are there any other places which might confuse readers? Thank you. Jappalang (talk) 00:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

This information was quite essential to understand the rest of the article. After a second read, I think the Gameplay section could use some expansion. Currently, it is rather minimal and does not contain much information beyond the terms themselves. For example, the description of the real-time strategy elements in the game is pretty much a standard RTS. What was new and had influence on the genre in this game? Furthermore, the shooter part of the game (as written in the lead!) is not expanded upon at all. User:Krator (t c) 22:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I have expanded the Gameplay section. I hope it can help you envision the game clearer. There are difficulties here as Giants is more appreciated for its humor and being a "first" in TPS-RTS than for intricate gameplay. Hence reviews and previews tend to skip any details on its shooter aspects. Are there any suggestions to help on this aspect? Jappalang (talk) 15:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I had two points which I wanted to bring up (sorry, keep getting distracted), the expansion of gameplay has already dealt with one. The other was the article lead, it's very slim considering the wealth of good information accrued in the article. Some expansion there would seal the deal as far as I'm concerned. It's an excellent article, great work. Someoneanother 00:01, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Lead has been expanded. Hopefully it contains the main flavor of the article. Are there anything else which needs improvement? Jappalang (talk) 03:48, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned it's down to the good article reviewer now, and for Krator to give feedback in relation to the A rating. Thanks for your work. Someoneanother 05:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Agreeing with A-class, that's three editors so I'm going to go ahead and award it. --PresN (talk) 16:46, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I think congratulations are in order for Jappalang whose effort on this article is almost singlehandedly responsible for the A-class designation. Nice work, Jappalang! --Bryan H Bell (talk) 22:16, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

GA

I've passed as GA. The only minor issue if you were to go to FAC with this would be some minor grammar issues; I suggest running it through a good copyedit. David Fuchs ^(talk) 03:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Development

May be worth to mention more explicitly:

(For reasons already mentioned in the article) Planet Moon was in extreme hurry when releasing Giants, it was "basically ripped out of their hands by Interplay" (from private conversation).

Some evidence:

• They accidentally left both multiplayer cheats (via the in-game editor) and a command line argument to disable the CD check in the initial release version (http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/doswin/code/197449.html)
• At about half of the game in-game videos become less frequent and are completely absent in the last third (except Kabuto fight at the very end). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.36.200.216 (talk) 14:41, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, all these are just theories and guesswork. Wikipedia is reliant on information published by reliable sources. If you can find such information sites that are reliable (generally established sites with rigorous editorial processes and not personal blogs or casual sites), we can take a look at the information and determine if it can be worked into the article. Jappalang (talk) 00:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)