Talk:Mega Man (video game)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Mega Man (video game) has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
May 17, 2010 WikiProject peer review Reviewed
June 13, 2010 Good article nominee Listed
August 30, 2013 Guild of Copy Editors Copyedited
Current status: Good article
WikiProject Video games (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
This article has had a peer review which is now archived.
Note icon
This article was a past project collaboration.

Super Deformed art style[edit]

Keiji Inafune said in an interview that he originally planned to make Mega Man look [super deformed], but could not, due to the hardware constraints of the NES.

Anymore information on this? I've never heard of this, and I can't find anything about it. The Trigger (talk) 17:58, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Influences from the game[edit]

Anyone have any ideas how to tackle the "Influences from the game" section of the artical?--ZeWrestler 15:48, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Game overview[edit]

The overview of the game has alredy been covered in the article's introduction, should we remove this section? If this was inteneded to be about the game's plot or storyline, then it probably should be re-titled. —Kjammer 09:31, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Taken care of. We need information on the story though as well as other stuff. K1Bond007 16:54, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

Should there be a mention of what genre the game is? Zapateria 17:49, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

Of course :) K1Bond007 18:47, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

Powerups[edit]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the "E. Tank" powerup was ever in this game. Remember this aticle is about the NES game Mega Man, not the series. — Kjammer 01:12, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Your right- I just went auto pilot on power-ups. My mistake. Themissinglint 02:21, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Common Enemies[edit]

Who wants to handel the common enemy section of this artical? ZeWrestler 21:50, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I can identify some common enemies that have made appearences in later games of the series, but I don't know their names (or what they're called). If I knew the enimies' official names (not named by fans) I could start something. Also, I'm not sure how this section should be formated. —Kjammer 07:27, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Here you go, enemy names and stats. The numbers (for HP/AP) should be divided by 10 if you'd like them to be "bars of energy" but are derived from official sources as-is. I suggest the spelling gabyool instead of Auto's gabyoall, pickerman instead of Auto's pickelman, and while I personally prefer metool the current canon spelling is very unfortunately mettaur (both preferred to Auto's metall). Auto has compiled similar lists for Rockman 2 and Rockman 3 as well. --Boco XLVII 21:05, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Actually, the names provided in that link don't seem to match up with the names provided in the instructional booklet for the NES cartridge (which were the names listed in the Wiki article before they were changed to the names provided in the aforementioned link). -- 24.119.243.65

The instruction booklet is wrong, or at least inconsistent with later games in the series, so I chose the Japanese enemy names instead. If you'd like to revert to the English names, sure, but then later games will have enemies in the same robot series with completely dissimilar names. --Boco XLVII 16:23, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
Oh, I wasn't aware the instruction booklet was inconsistant with later games in the series. That's fine, then. To be fair, all the games seem rather inconsistant as far as names go (Met? Metool? Metaul?). For instance, the enemy called Adhereing Suzy is called Octopus Battery in the MM1 instructional booklet and Lazy Suzy in at least one Game Boy title. So going with the Japanese names is probably a good solution, anyway. -- 24.119.243.65
It's still called "Suzy", though, which is the point. Those enemies are in the "Suzy" series, and like enemies in the "Metool" series or "Joe" series or "Gabyool" series they all share certain features. But the series names are obscured in the English version.
But I understand what you mean by the inconsistent translation of Metool (メットール). The current favored translation, of all things, is "Mettaur", which started in Battle Network 2 and then was reused in the later BN games as well as in Anniversary Collection. I use the spelling Metool to highlight the word's origin - metal tool. The official English spelling is "Mettaur" so if you'd like to change it go ahead - it's still recognisably the same name. --Boco XLVII 15:56, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm putting the attacks in "bars" and hp in "MB", which will be noted as "bars of life" and "Megablaster shots." The x10 multiplier isn't really neccesary. Themissinglint 03:40, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Box-covers[edit]

This is more out of curiosity, but still. Does anyone know what motivation was behind these early and quite horrible covers for the Mega Man titles?

I have seen a set of images which I believe to be the original Japanese covers because they were all done in a secific style and were very different from the ones seen here. The European (PAL) versions had their own covers for the first two games (the Mega Man II cover was very different from the North American version though still a bit quirky) and I believe that Germany actually had its own version for MM2 which was more true to the anime-ish style of graphics. I think from Mega Man III onward the covers for the North American and Europe were identical except for some slight localisation which was limited to Mega Man's face and decorations on his outfit which were removed in the European versions and his face was re-drawn in a more anime-ish style (and naturally the "Nintendo Seal of Quality" which is elliptic in North America and Round in Europe).

This all finally ended with Mega Man VII the cover of which was pretty much the same in all versions (I might be wrong though since Rock seemed more muscle-bound in that version).

  • From what I understand, the reason the box art for Mega Man 1's North American release looks so terrible is that the artist was given literally a day to produce it. (Watch the G4 special on Mega Man included in the Gamecube version of MMAC, I'm pretty sure they mention it there.)
Was Mega Man Anniversary Collection ever released in Europe or in PAL-form for that matter?
I don't think so, but I could be wrong.


On a related note, wouldn't it be better if remove that ugly American NES coverart and simply put a logo or something? At the very least, we could put a cover gallery as a subsection in this article. Jonny2x4 22:07, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure you're right since there hasn't been any word from Capcom and the European Mega Man homepage isn't exactly helpful or very insightful. It bites 'cause I'm a big fan and would have bought in a second.
The final fantasy project got in a big debate about using logos when Final Fantasy VI was being voted on for FA status.--ZeWrestler Talk 23:20, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
How about including a section in the mega man article which talks about how the mega man box art has been rated the worst box art ever made? 193.157.229.76 (talk) 08:40, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


I found a page with pics from the original Japanese, US and EU covers, the page is in Thai, but the pictures are prominent. http://www.gameclubretro.com/article?id=20629&lang=th Of course it would be nice to have the original Japanese cover in the article as well besides the terrible US one, but I'm not sure if it is allowed. Any suggestions?87.161.108.144 (talk) 02:48, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

FA[edit]

hey,

anyone think we can get this article up to FA status? --ZeWrestler Talk 16:04, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Error in article[edit]

This is also the only game in the series with a slightly severe control bug which cause Mega Man to slide when he stops running. While it has little effect in the overall gameplay it is known to cause a few unnecessary "death-slips" when a player attempts to pick up a power-up located at the end of a platform.

  1. First off, this doesn't only happen in the first Mega Man game, it also happens in Mega Man 2.
  2. Also, why do you consider it a bug? This is obviously not a bug, but a feature, since support for the easing slide to a stop has to be programmed in; and when something is programmed in specifically, then it's definitely not a glitch. If they considered it a glitch, they would have just cut straight to speed = 0 rather than implementing easing.
  3. This type of behavior is default in many other games from that era (like Super Mario Bros. 3, for example). --Michiel Sikma 11:58, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
  • To have the character slide a significant distance after running instead of coming to a full stop is hardly a feature to be proud of. Also, the Mega Man 2 article mentions that the bug was partially fixed and the slide is not as severe as it was in this game. But if you think bug is the wrong word maybe programming goof would be more approapriate. I also don't think that the SMB3 interface is really comparable since it works on a system based on momentum, which is not the way most Mega Man games feature since they only have one running speed (where as in Mario you hold the B button in order to run).
    • With the help of Bisqwit, it's now known that this is actually a feature rather than a glitch. --Michiel Sikma 19:33, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
"It is deliberate. There are a couple of animation frames specifically reserved for the deacceleration delay. (...) I could trivially disable the deacceleration delay by changing the "lda #$01" to "lda #$00" at ::$95ED in bank 5, making his deacceleration delay into 0 frames. Mistake proven.
; Make Megaman slow down after running
$95E8> A9 0C:   LDA #$0C
$95EA> 8D 0004: STA ObjectSpriteNum+0
$95ED> A9 01:   LDA #$01
$95EF> 8D 4004: STA ObjectUnknown440+0
As you note, my disassembly has some Unknowns. I haven't figured out the meaning of all object variables yet. The complete code is at http://bisqwit.iki.fi/jutut/megamansource/maincode.txt." (quotes by Bisqwit).
I decided to just remove it myself, since it's now been proven that it is, in fact, a feature. --Michiel Sikma 20:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Rock = Rock, Rock =/=Mega?[edit]

I'd like to point out to everyone here that Rockman and Mega Man are two different names, yet in all canon, Mega Man's old household robot name is Rock. I've made the changes, and I'm posting here to explain why I've done such a change. My sources are the Rockman sourcebook.LanceHeart 18:52, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah? Well, in the upcomming Mega Man Powered Up (the American version of Rockman Rockman), they're retconning Rock's name to Mega, so that makes your point moot. Check the videos at GameSpot and listen for yourself. Rock is clearly called "Mega" in one of the videos. - NES Boy 18:15, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Last I heard, there was a problem with the translation that made them mess up and call him Mega in the video. The entire community has alerted Capcom to this and is already hoping that a change will be made in time for the North American release. So I guess that makes your point moot. What's more, the retconning of Rock to Mega was a mistake done in a previous build of the game, meaning the actual game was far from finished at that point. LanceHeart 04:08, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
It's Mega. The game has been released, and Rock has been retconned in English. If they remake Mega Man 4 in a Powered Up series, the name will stay as Mega.
I don't abide by one-track releases. Throughout every previous release, stateside and Japanese (which determines the real canon), it has been consistently Rock. Remakes are usually regarded as fan-service and good fun, but not consistant with previous data. This release in nothing different. We use Rock. -ZeroTalk 17:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Attn: 67.171.209.4[edit]

I moved the Mega X summary to this page as it is more appropriate towards the first X game. I figued someone else would have removed it altogether, so no hard feelings okay? 71.115.210.70

Intro image[edit]

I've reverted the intro image from the boxcover back to a picture of megaman several times. I find the cover hillarious, and I believe it deserves a place in this article (which it already has btw), but I think it's very inapplicable for the intro. The first image people should see should be what megaman actually looks like, not the way it got laughably butchered. Vicarious 05:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

The first picture people should see is a picture of the box art, not the character - which, might I add, the article isn't about. How hilariously bad the box art is has nothing to do with it. --Shadow Hog 07:35, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Good point, the picture seems so much like a prank or parody that I forgot it's the topic of the article. Vicarious 09:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

VIRUS ALERT[edit]

macfee is a lifesaver i almost got a virus from planet megaman that website is in the wiki site links be careful.

The site has no virus on it. At most, McAffee was going bonkers as it usually does and detected a virus where there isn't one. Planet Megaman is completely safe, unless the ads tried to do something malicious. LanceHeart 18:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Possible origin of the Elecman Stage Theme[edit]

In YTMND.com I found out that part of the song is remarkably similar to that of R.E.M´s All the Right Friends. Should this be mentioned in the article or was the Mega Man version just a minor coincidence? Vic729 02:09 January 22nd, 2007 (UTC)

I heard this a while ago on MMHP. I don't think it should be in, because it's not a fact, it's more of an opinion. You could put it as speculation, but personally, I don't think it's that imprortant.

Rob223 21:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


Difficulty[edit]

One of the hardest NES games? Really? I beg to differ. It's not a complete cakewalk, but it's no Battletoads. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.172.169.21 (talk) 15:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC) I also find the Difficulty subcategory unfitting of this game. A lot of the content is highly subjective, since there are no sources (e.g. The other and most notable roadblock for most players, even experienced ones, is the Yellow Devil end boss.). Even if there were sources claiming that experienced players had problems with Yellow Devil, I'd say it's pretty subjective. There's no actual data that can confirm this, it's made up of assumptions. A weekly top 10 list that happened to include the game hardly justifies the content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.11.218.215 (talk) 16:09, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Strategy Guide Material[edit]

I just want to say up front that this article needs some major cleanup. Not only does this needs verifiable, third-party sources, but it also needs to lose the strategy guide material — stuff you can get on StrategyWiki or GameFAQs. I will start by removing some sections which contain nothing but strategy guide material. MuZemike (talk) 18:59, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

C-class[edit]

This is also more appropriate for this article to move down to C-Class. This article has entire sections are unreferenced as well as many sections containing little or no verifiable, third-party references. Major cleanup in the structure of the article itself is also needed. MuZemike (talk) 19:13, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Airman ga taosenai (Airman can't be defeated)[edit]

I came looking for more information about what spawned this:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=hUVdA9ABzpg

...I found only this:

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A8%E3%82%A2%E3%83%BC%E3%83%9E%E3%83%B3%E3%81%8C%E5%80%92%E3%81%9B%E3%81%AA%E3%81%84

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.216.121.37 (talk) 00:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Robot Masters[edit]

I've started a discussion about including Robot Masters in Mega Man articles. If you have an opinion, please remark here. Lumaga (talk) 06:25, 27 September 2008 (UTC) go for it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.170.202.151 (talk) 13:33, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Plot Section[edit]

I noticed that there was no Plot section, so I added one. It's not very good, but it's a start.--Unscented (talk) 21:44, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Very good, but I will include the missing detail.Also where did you find the information about Wily reprogramming Rock? any referrence? if not it needs to be removed.--76.110.16.131 (talk) 16:23, 20 February 2010 (UTC)Jesse Brown Thisisjess@gmail.com

"Clarified Storyline"[edit]

I changed this back to "Changed from the original storyline" as it was before. It seems more accurate, as the section is describing how the storyline was modified, not how it was made less ambiguous.--Unscented (talk) 01:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Megaman and Megaman Powered Up Seperation[edit]

Does anone think that Megaman and Megaman: Powered Up should be seperated to 2 sepeate Articles?--Wiki Master Dude (Talk) 10:05, 18 December 2008 (GMC)

It's debatable. Seeing as this game is a remake, it should be kept here. Fortenium (talk) 07:43, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Some coverage in Famitsu[edit]

After trawling on the 'net for old Famitsu issues on other games, I came across this one if anyone is interested in incorporating into the article: http://www.disgruntleddesigner.com/chrisc/secret/FC__1987Q4.html#rockman . –MuZemike 20:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mega Man (video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Guyinblack25 talk 15:25, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    The prose is in good shape aside from one issue I think would confuse the layman.
    The lead and development sections refer to the Famicom and NES in a way that implies that they are two different systems, when really they are just two different regional names for the same system. I would stick to the NES name and refer to the regional markets instead. For example, "Famicom home console market" → "Japanese home console market". I think this will better convey that the game was originally designed for a single system.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Things look good here.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Does a good job of covering the major aspects in sufficient detail.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    Reads neutral to me
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    Articles looks to be stable with no major changes occurring.
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    The FURs for File:NES Mega Man.png File:MegaManPoweredUp.jpg need some beefing up similar to File:MegamanBox.jpg.
    Is there a better image to use in place of the Powered Up cover? Perhaps a screenshot that shows the chibi-design, widescreen dimensions, and either a cutscene or new boss? Not essential, but something to think about.
    Another minor issue, the alt text for File:Keiji Inafune.jpg does not describe the image. Something along the lines of "a Japanese man in a black coat" or something similar.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    The article is in very good shape, but I'm putting it on hold until the prose and FUR issues above are sorted out.
    The above issues have been addressed. Good job. (Guyinblack25 talk 04:07, 13 June 2010 (UTC))

Original Backstory[edit]

I have (after several weekends of searching) uncovered the original japanese manual of MEGA MAN, which should have the ORIGINAL BACKSTORY. For, the U.S. manual had essentially made-up everything in that backstory, which was then contradicted in later games entirely.

So, this is it -- the original backstory...

Except I CAN'T READ JAPANESE!! If anyone wants to translate it, PLEASE let me know!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.204.182.27 (talk) 21:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

The only thing changed from the Japanese version was that Dr. Wily worked as Light's assistant whereas in the original story he's just a generic mad scientist. It may be worth putting in a footnote in the Dr. Wily article but not here. --TheHande (talk) 16:53, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Copyedit notes[edit]

Here are some notes I jotted during my copyedit request:

  • Lede doesn't accurately summarize the article, and mentions items that are not elaborated within the article. (Almost every sentence.) Plot and gameplay summary need special attention.
  • Worth explaining why the game had follow-ups even though it wasn't a success
  • Plot section is all backstory. Needs to include actual plot.
  • How does MM "fight" through levels
  • Explained how MM's health goes up but not down
  • Gameplay section needs to be re-footnoted since content moved around
  • first use of "standard blaster" unexplained
  • "platform generator item": clarify
  • I'd try to pick "level" or "stage" and stay consistent
  • what is "clearing" a stage? All enemies defeated, or just finishing the stage?
  • everything fallen enemies drop should be in the same sentence the first time instead of said separately
  • consider merging plot and gameplay sections, if appropriate
  • final boss battle not described
  • is it important to mention "Inafking", the moniker? Is it important tomention Street Fighter, or is it better to explain why he was necessary to the project or why he switched?
  • First two paragraphs of dev section can be restructured, but I didn't want to move things around with tenuous footnoting
  • Consider converting the quote into prose
  • "he is often credited for designing the hero Mega Man": needs direct citation
  • who was his mentor at Capcom, responsible for the other half of MM?
  • "when he joined the company" or when he joined the TEAM?
  • designing/creating, check whether the word choice is intentional
  • Mega Man's character development warrants its own paragraph/section
  • "transformation" quote should be summarized in prose
  • are "tom-pon", "chanchacorin" mentions necessary? I removed these as trivia.
  • "three notes at one time": not sure what this means
  • lots of sentences that need sourcing, shouldn't just be implied from surrounding footnotes
  • "Critical reception for Mega Man has been favorable." can be better—how about how it's a classic or a better summarization of the paragraph?
  • this section can be beefed up with more thoughts from critics and sales
  • 'awarded it the "Star Player" accolade after': what?
  • any sentence with claims needs sources
  • reconfigure beginning of legacy section into reception—legacy should be really what happened after the game's individual era was over
  • where is "overseas"?
  • "infamous in the gaming": infamous for what
  • "concept for these designs" quote into prose
  • were oil and time men the two cut from the original eight?
  • "100 challenges to complete": replaces "challenges" with the kind of challenges
  • four non-free images on the page, didn't check rationales, but since they each represent something reflected in the article, could be feasible
  • "Inafune designed and illustrated nearly all...": bold claims need direct citations
  • Too much of an emphasis throughout article on Inafune (including "Artist Keiji Inafune played a large role in the development of Mega Man." now removed). If he was very important (other than the art), explain why, and if he isn't, he should be balanced with other figures on the dev team.
  • Did not copyedit or spot-check refs

Czar review discussion[edit]

Discussion below (only comment in-line where absolutely necessary). Checking (✓) at the beginning of the items you've covered is okay too. I'm not watching the page, so ping me if you'd like follow-up or further copyedits. I am not watching this page—whisperback if you'd like a response czar · · 13:43, 30 August 2013 (UTC)