Jump to content

Talk:Batman: Arkham Origins

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mainstreammark (talk | contribs) at 15:29, 27 October 2013 (Plot: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconVideo games C‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:
WikiProject iconComics: Batman C‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Batman work group.

Useful sources

This section reserved for addition of useful sources for expanding article at a later date: Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:44, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know if the following can be pruned for development/gameplay info, or people for the infobox. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:01, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This may contain additional info about the game's season pass. Mainly details on the "Initiation" Pack DLC - Mainstreammark (talk) 21:50, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reception refs

http://community.wbgames.com/t5/Official-Announcements/The-Benefits-of-WBID/m-p/13#U13 Does this info in regards to getting this skin, help in anyways? (I'm leaning towards no.) - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:56, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The info appears to be legit, but since it's coming from a community admin, I don't believe it to be reliable enough for verification, IMO. - Mainstreammark (talk) 11:56, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. I did not clarify. I'm fine with the reliability. It's the info that the One Million suit is acquired through using WBID. But I didn't think that was necessary, as we have not added how any of the other skins are obtained. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 12:44, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Images for Article

This article only contains one image (found in the infobox), whereas Arkham Asylum and City have multiple images within their articles which are really helpful for a means of visual identification. Some good areas for an image or two would include the Gameplay and Characters sections. There is no rush for this, but I'm just saying that at one point it will be mandatory to find some free images to use in this article. I can not do this because of.....personal reasons you could say. Thank you Arkham Nation. - Mainstreammark (talk) 01:21, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is absolutely NOT mandatory that additional images be added. Images should only be added if they can help enhance the content already stated in the article. So if free images come about that can do this, then we can. But it isn't mandatory by any means. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:37, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's odd I typed "nice" not "mandatory". I have got to start using a desktop. Anyways, I am glad that you are open to this idea. Hope some free images can be found. - Mainstreammark (talk) 02:39, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Like Favre said, images are to be used with a purpose, not for decoration, and are not essential. If one can be found fine, but at the moment one clearly doesn't. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 20:27, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking users should try and aim to find a free image of Smith or Baker (don't know if any are already on Wikipedia), perhaps even an image of the new Remote Claw or Shock Gloves (if possible). - Mainstreammark (talk) 02:47, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively, editors could use the Template:External media to provide links to non-free media provided to news sources. A link to an image of the shock gloves would be a fine example.--Cast (talk) 15:41, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kirigi

Hey guys. Should Kirigi be added to the Characters section? I think so because of this source. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-09-26-batman-arkham-origins-pass-includes-five-of-the-games-dlc-packs Tell me what you think. - Mainstreammark (talk) 21:54, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No because he isn't part of the main game which is what that section is for and we have no idea what his role is, the only information available sounds like he is a challenge map boss, 'maybe', could just be in the background telling ninjas to kill you. Whichever it is will fit into that section when the information is available. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:07, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Further comments

Further comments to changes on 29 Sep as the edit summary box isn't big enough. The season pass skins are not identified in any sources so they can't be listed, I didn't notice them in the added ones anyway so I may have overlooked them. I have been looking but no source has given them yet. The season pass is a discount option for what is otherwise individually purchasable/preorderable/downloadable content and so it itself is not notable to mention. Please note that using retailers as sources is not always effective as they are often region specific, the source being used for the Black Mask DLC for instance is no use if you are outside of America, even if you ask it to redirect you to the American site it takes you to the homepage, not to the information about the Black Mask DLC. The retailers are not notable as much as identifying the actual content. The Skin Packs are collections of individual downloadable contents like the Season Pass, and I think just confuse the issue more than just referring to the individual items, as we are then grouping some together and then switching to individually mentioning others, which themselves may be included in other DLC packs or retail editions.

I'm wondering why Favre came to the conclusion that Dick Grayson is not Robin in Arkham Origins. Has been confirmed by Holmes on numerous occasions. With less than a month away and having not to worry about premature edits from unconfirmed users, we can wait till after the game's release and see how things play out. For now, I think it would be best to leave things the way they are until then. - Mainstreammark (talk) 17:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Music section

If it is staying in this article, per WP: NFC the album art would need to be removed as it is non free content that is similar to the infobox image. If it is ever split off the image can be readded. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 00:54, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well what can we do? That is the official game cover and that is the official soundtrack album cover. They do bear striking similarities but with the level of authenticity, there has to be some sort of exception that can be made for this situation. Would you mind explaining what you meant when you said "If it is ever split off the image can be re-added." I didn't quite understand. However, if we remove the soundtrack cover, it will be deleted in a matter of days. There's no guarantee that WBIE will release an all new unique and different soundtrack album after the one they've already published. We are at a crossroads here. So I say again, what should we do? - Mainstreammark (talk) 17:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dark is saying that if the info gets split to its own page (like it was originally) then the image can be added back, and you just use what you have there now, or reupload it. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:01, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What Favre said, the album cover is exactly the same as the infobox cover so it isn't necessary to retain it as it fails WP: NFC. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:20, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here is some response, as well as other issues brought up. For the skins, that was partially my bad. I had used this Arkhmverse source (yes I know it's a fan site, but hold on a sec), because they were one of the only sites to actually publish the actual press release from WBIE. However, looking at one of the few other sites that did publish this, Arkhamverse seemed to enhance the release with the skins in each pack. So that was my bad. However, I do believe that the skins should be listed in the packs as I don't think it would confuse the situation anymore. In my edit, I had all the skins that have been announced that correspond to the packs, and then the other leaked ones that are still unknown together. I didn't find that very confusing.

Next thing. Robin. I am still not convinced that this is Grayson, and the fact that we are getting confirmation from Holmes, who isn't even working on the multiplayer part of the game, isn't helping. We have a valid source, that confirmed from Splash Damage it is Drake, and all of the skins are Tim Drake related. None are any costume Grayson ever wore (except the Animated series one). The "classic" Robin costume is Tim Drake's first Robin costume, and you can tell because the cape is black with a yellow underside, while Dick's was all yellow. I don't know if this is just more WP:SYNTH on my part, but unless we have a better source confirming Dick Grayson, the article should either say it's Tim (because we have a proper source) or just say Batman and Robin, with Robin just going to Robin (comics). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 18:01, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the Arkhamverse site but after googling for its version of the press release, i'm less convinced that all the other sites removed that list, and more convinced that Arkham Verse edited in the list of skins. Not that I question what the skins are, but it needs sourcing and for whatever freakish reason there isn't a single site out there that actually goes into detail about the skin packs. As for mentioning the packs themselves, they are a form of delivery, a grouping of digital content, putting "The Millennium Pack" in the prose doesn't enhance the detail and the name alone makes no sense, and some of the skins are available individual in various regions/outlets so it is pointless to specify that under certain circumstances they come together. As for Robin, I don't really know what is going on, but it probably is easier to just link to Robin rather than an individual version of Robin as its more the costume that is important considering neither character appears in story content. With the skin changes it seems like it can be whatever Robin you want it to be. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:19, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I just found an issue with your source Favre. Take a look at comment 28 here. The validity is now in serious question. - Mainstreammark (talk) 21:33, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, if we are to make a separate page for the music section, I can't take that responsibility. I did it once already (myself) and I just don't have the strength to do it again. Second, a source from Eric Holmes confirming Grayson is not invalid by any means, it's just as valid as the source about Drake. No disrespect intended, but a representative from Splash Damage, could have been misunderstood easily. If you can, try to find more valid sources that confirm Drake, as I can find a handful that confirm Grayson. But that wouldn't really be very professional. Blake brings up an excellent point, that we should link Robin to Robin's page, not Dick or Tim's. As for the skins, I think that classifying skins into packs would be good.....but only for those such as ourselves. Those who just opened up Origins' page can easily be mislead or confused by it. Blake is right, If we put a "Millennium" pack or something like a "Darkest Days" pack, many would be confused. I would probably even be a bit misunderstanding. For us it would be best to use packs, but for all the people out there who will read the article, it would not be. As Favre said, "I didn't find that very confusing". I believe him, but I also believe that there would be many who would find it confusing. As for the region discussion, I don't have enough knowledge on that to put up an argument, so I'll let you both come up with a decision that's best for all. - Mainstreammark (talk) 19:01, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gioachino Rossini

Well would you look at that. Turns out that "The Thieving Magpie" is actually a theme from an opera by Rossini. Rossini is commonly referred to by just his last name. Should be noted within the article. - Mainstreammark (talk) 00:48, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Modified release date in Infobox

As far as I have read it, the game is still coming out for those platforms on the original date, October 25, just the boxed copies are delayed. So the game itself is making its European release on time, we shoudl mention it in the article but to say the European release is two weeks late because of only the boxed copy is wrong. This doesn't apply to the WiiU I imagine unless it has a digital delivery service, but the PC one is making its date in one form. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 12:14, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was very unsure on how to add the info. I read it as the Wii U (regardless of form) was delayed the two weeks, while only the physical PC release was delayed that time as well. Would it possibly be better to just leave it as "WW October 25, 2013" and then add a note next to it, with the note saying, "In Europe, the Wii U and physical Microsoft Windows versions were delayed until November 8, 2013."? Or just keep that info in the release section? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:52, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the infobox should still say "WW October 25, 2013", because on the same day the news source revealed the delay, Eric Holmes confirmed the release specifics, yet again in this video. However, the delay details should still be noted within the Release section of the article. - Mainstreammark (talk) 18:36, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The delay should be noted in the article if only to record how reamed the WiiU version has been with this game, and we could add a footnote about the date. Realistically it's only the WiiU version which is unobtainable in any form before November 8 in the EU. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:55, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That works for me. - Mainstreammark (talk) 19:10, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I will attempt an edit, based on what was said. Feel free to revert or modify further. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:04, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Users That Won't Be Editing the Article from October 23 Until Completion of the Game

Please list your user name here if you won't be editing the article from October 23 until game completion. - Mainstreammark (talk) 20:21, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Mainstreammark

Plot

The plot currently contains 1112 words. The hidden note said between 400 and 700 words. It seems very well written at this point. Any ideas on how we could trim it down? - Mainstreammark (talk) 15:29, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]