From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Video games (Rated B-class, Low-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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Sega task force.
WikiProject Japan (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 10:08, October 24, 2017 (JST, Heisei 29) (Refresh)
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


How is his name pronounced? 20:59, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

It's "RIST-ar" (as in "wrist"). Brittany Ka 03:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I thought it was "Rye-star". 22:19, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
It's written in katakana as "リスター" (risutaa) Brittany Ka 03:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I've always pronounced it "REE-star", and here's why. I called both the ESRB and Sega's game counselors back when Ristar was a new game. The pre-recorded ESRB message pronounced it "REE-star", and multiple live Sega game counselors pronounced it this way as well. (Yeah, there were Sega game counselors back in the day, not just Nintendo ones... I remember being angry at having to listen to a two-minute advertisement before even being placed on hold... and it was a long-distance call!) Anyway, my two cents. I guess all of those people could have all been wrong... I definitely am not confident enough to say that this is the "official" pronunciation, but I have heard it pronounced this way by multiple people, including people who worked for Sega. Doc Sigma (wait, what?) 14:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
rye-star?!! There's no "ye" in there, retard! -lysdexia 01:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
That...was unnecessary. RedZionX 06:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Ristar Cluster[edit]

Does anyone know what happened to the Ristar Cluster fansite? It contained quite a treasure trove of information, but I can't seem to find it now. Alternately, does anyone know how to contact Djbrayster to find out what happened to it? Esn 03:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

It was an awesome website... They were even in the middle of uncovering more beta stuff. Maybe Djbrayster couldn't manage the site any longer? Someone should still pick it up, it had a lost of exclusive material on there. Actually, now that I think of it, wasn't it affiliated with Sonic CulT at one time? I'm sure if you were to ask around there, you can find out what happened. 17:48, 27 June 2007 (UTC) - Yay, it's back! (talk) 15:59, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Djbrayster (talk) 21:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC) Sorry for the delay in the site coming back. had some major issues offline which are still present and caused a delay in bringing the site back. It is really nice to know people really like the site. I am trying to keep up with updates and small site changes. thanks again.

It was a great site! Unfortunately, it looks like I missed its resurrection; as of now, it is down once again. currently goes to a 404.
If you are having trouble paying for the site to stay up, Djbrayster, perhaps you might want to consider asking Classic Gaming to host you? Explain your situation and ask if they're interested. The hosts of The Pages of Now and Forever did that a few years ago, and it seems to be working well. Esn (talk) 02:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

==Version Differences/Planets==[edit]

What happened to these 2 sections?!?

Lockshaw13 14:54, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

They were deleted by User:TTN. Good luck arguing with him about it. -- RattleMan 20:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
This article looks more barren than ever. 12:57, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Ristar prototypes released[edit]

Some prototypes of Ristar for both versions have recently been unearthed and are in need of coverage. One interesting thing about it is that at one point in development he was known as Dexstar. — NES Boy (talk) 23:39, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Ristar = Sonic Rabbit[edit]

Ristar developed from an idea originally put forward during design talks for the character who would later become Sonic the Hedgehog. Yuji Naka, head of Sonic Team, recalled in 1992:

Some years later, the game starring that rabbit-type character was developed separately from Sonic, and eventually evolved into a prototype called Feel. The rabbit resemblance in Feel was already phased out and the character no longer used his ears, but his arms.

That was taken from the main page. While Yuji Naka did say what is quoted he didn't say that Ristar is an evolution of Sonic the Rabbit. We need a citation cause we cant have mis-information like this going around the internet.--MathUser2929 (talk) 18:02, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

The problem is you cannot trump solid information, such as the game credits and actual development history with some poorly written review based on this myth. Even if Yuji Naka worked on some tech five years before this game, it obviously wasn't significant enough for the man to get a credit. We don't credit people for movies on Wikipedia if their name is not in the credits and it should not happen for video games. Check, Ristar is NOT developed by Sonic Team and Yuji Naka had no hand in it.

Even in this Yuji Naka quote he does not in any way say that this rabbit character evolved into Ristar. Notice in this quote Yuji Naka does not once even mention Feel or Ristar. Unless you can fill in the blanks where Sega or Sonic Team themselves confirmed that this rabbit character became Ristar, stop spreading misinformation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:58, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

GG Release dates & Bare URLs[edit]

Does someone have the dates on hand? Will also needs sources, obviously, and for the other release dates too, if possible. I'll look into it. Should also think about converting the bare URLs in citations to proper {cite...} templates. --Salvidrim! T·C 17:02, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

RfC: "Sega Mega Drive/Genesis" instead of just "Genesis"?[edit]

Should the article simply mention this game was released for the "Genesis" or should it state "Sega Mega Drive/Genesis" (and possibly just one of the terms after the first usage for the sake of brevity) for the sake of clarity and non-North American users? -- (talk) 20:36, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Mega Drive "Sega Mega Drive/Genesis" is more accurate, less region-specific, and provides better clarity as a result. -- (talk) 20:38, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Genesis - Its redundant to write out "Sega Mega Drive/Genesis" over and over again. At Sega Genesis, the name of the article, it explains the name differences in regions. Just as it is unacceptable for user to switch from different region's spelling on whims (ie switching "favorite" to "favourite",) this is unnecessary. There is no product called "The Sega Mega Drive/Genesis", so we shouldn't write it out like that. There has been tons of arguments on how to handle this at the talk page for Sega Genesis, and using "Sega Genesis" is the current consensus. I see no reason why not to follow that consensus here. Sergecross73 msg me 20:39, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment - I didn't suggest writing "Sega Mega Drive/Genesis" through the entire article, only in the first instance (and potentially category fields, etc.) and then a single term thereafter (which should be "Mega Drive" in my opinion as that's the most neutral term. The fact the Genesis article explains the naming issue isn't an excuse for using a regional term in this article, rather than a more international one, or a compromise between the two, as I've suggested. The fact the game originates in Japan where the Mega Drive is known as such, rather than Genesis is further weight in favour of using the Japanese/International name. A simple solution to the fact no product isn't called "Sega Mega Drive/Genesis" (although I don't think that's a valid argument, frankly) would be to instead say "Sega Mega Drive (known as Genesis in North America)". There are plenty of reasonable ways to work through this rather than just stubbornly refusing to change it from "Genesis" for no good reason. -- (talk) 20:48, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
  • This has been discussed to death. Current consensus is to use "Sega Genesis" at that article's page. You're not introducing any new concepts here, its all been said before. The categories consensus is also to use "Sega Genesis". This issue is far bigger than the single game Ristar, and this really isn't even the proper place to discuss this. I suggest you take this to the Sega Genesis article if you truly want to open this can of worms again. Sergecross73 msg me 20:52, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict)Genesis - Having both names everywhere makes the article messier and doesn't add anything particularly useful. If the reader wants additional clarification, clicking and reading Sega Genesis would easily solve that problem. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 20:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment Again, if you would actually ready what I'm proposing, I'm not suggesting using both names throughout the article. I'm suggesting we use the international name, and for the sake of compromise after the first revert I was suggesting we use both names in the opening paragraph to it's clear to both North American and international readers what is meant. If we are to opt for one name over another, it should obviously be the more widely used term of "Sega Mega Drive" rather than "Genesis". -- (talk) 20:51, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
  • It makes no sense to not use the name given at the actual article. Sega Genesis. If that was the right course of action, then the article would be named as such. Go take your argument, gain consensus to change that article's title, then come here and change it. Right now though, there's no consensus behind your reasoning. Sergecross73 msg me 20:54, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
  • That article's name doesn't have any bearing on the term used in this article though. They're obviously different. This isn't a game for the Genesis, because the Genesis is the term for the North American variant of the Mega Drive. For that same reason the article Variations of the Sega Mega Drive isn't called "Variation of the Sega Genesis", because it would be awkward and incorrect, which is exactly what using "Genesis" in this article is. -- (talk) 21:01, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
  • You're just rehashing the same arguments from the debates at the Sega Genesis article talk page. Some feel because more regions sold it as SMD, it should be named as such, where others feel that, since more were actually sold in regions that named it Genesis, that Genesis is more common, and should be used. Right now, Genesis is the consensus, and so it should be shown as such in other articles such as this. Sergecross73 msg me 21:10, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
  • No, I'm not, you're just not comprehending what I'm saying. There are arguments for calling the article "Genesis", like - as you just said - more units were sold under that name than as "Mega Drive". However that doesn't change the fact that the original and international name is "Mega Drive" and that "Genesis" is the name of the a North American variant. That could be used as an argument for calling the article "Sega Mega Drive", but that's not what I'm doing - I'm saying that because of this inequivocabile fact, articles that pertain to the console such as this (or again such as Variations of the Sega Mega Drive) should use the international name (or as a compromise both names) because they're pertaining to the console as a whole, not one regional variant of it. -- (talk) 21:14, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
  • You're confusing "not comprehending" with "not agreeing". Let's let some other people weigh in, as we're already starting to talk circles, just like in those endless debates at the Sega Genesis article... Sergecross73 msg me 21:19, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I'd also like to point out that your statement "Genesis is the consensus, and so it should be shown as such in other articles such as this." is directly contradicting Wikipedia:Article titles which states "the use of a name in the title of one article [does not] require that all related articles use the same name in their titles; there is often some reason for inconsistencies in common usage". -- (talk) 20:27, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, but you've failed to provide a compelling argument to not use "Genesis". You've just spouted off all of your arguments presented at length at the Sega Genesis article, none of which lead to the use of "Sega Master System". This is no different than the people who go about changing dates between "dmy" and "mdy" or "Color" to "Colour" in articles because that's what they use. There's no need to change it, the Wiki-link when using Sega Genesis explains things plenty. Sergecross73 msg me 20:47, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I have explained my reasons, and they are different from the wider Mega Drive vs Genesis debate. You just don't happen to agree with them. The issue is that the Genesis is a subset of Mega Drive (being only a single variant), not the other way round. So technically this is a Mega Drive game (especially since it was developed in Japan - regional specifics of the subject are also to be considered in issues regarding international variances). If it was only released in North America then I would have no issue with referring to it as a Genesis game. On a side note, we shouldn't have to rely on users reading other articles in order for this one to be as accurate and informative as it could be with a simple edit. My suggestion of using "Mega Drive/Genesis" in the first instance and then a single term (either Mega Drive or Genesis) thereafter is a clear improvement to the article. And your stubborn hostility towards making such a change is, frankly, baffling. -- (talk) 20:55, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm not interested in arguing the name use any further. Too many people have already wasted a tremendous amount of time in those arguments. There's either consensus against your line of thinking, or at best for you, a WP:NOCONSENSUS, which still results in no change, and that's not changing as long as we're just rehashing the same old arguments. Sergecross73 msg me 20:59, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Two people against one does not a consensus make. There's not even consensus on the Genesis article, which is why it's currently protected. -- (talk) 21:02, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
I know that. It makes a WP:NOCONSENSUS. Please read that link, on what happens in that situation. Sergecross73 msg me 21:04, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
  • If you know that then you should have been honest and said that we currently have no consensus, rather than implying that there was also the option that consensus was against my line of thinking (as it isn't) to make your argument appear stronger (which it isn't). I don't need to read the link, I've been editing Wikipedia for around a decade now. -- (talk) 21:07, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Same IP doesn't mean it was me (it wasn't). Also, please see WP:PA since this that was unrelated from the topic at hand. -- (talk) 21:41, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Of course. I figured that or it was your little brother, right? No, you're just a decade long IP hopper, of course. (Sorry to have changed the subject, but then again, it was no more or less on topic than your alleged decade of experience.) It wasn't a personal attack as much as an observation from your edit history, but otherwise, you're right, lets get back on topic. With that out of the way, lets wait for others input. Sergecross73 msg me 22:04, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Taken as an Eng/Var issue, this article has been written from the American point of view since the beginning, and should therefore stay that way. (Thems the rules.)
However, I don't see why anybody should be opposed to a single parenthetical note that the console is also called the Megadrive. APL (talk) 04:18, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Looking around, there doesn't seem to be any consistency on this issue. Some game articles just mention one name, some of them mention it with a slash (then use the one name afterwards), and some of them mention it with a parenthetical(then use just one name afterwards).
So it doesn't seem like there's any harm in adding a single parenthetical note to this article. It won't make it any more or less consistent with other articles.
However, making this simple change shouldn't be seen as an excuse to change the eng/var of the article! APL (talk) 04:28, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, and I did offer this up as a compromise (use Mega Drive/Genesis in the first instance and then one or the other thereafter) but Sergecross was having none of it. Your observation about the article being written from a US-centric viewpoint is also interesting, maybe another way this article could be improved would be by giving it a more international perspective. e.g. reception from industry-respected, non-US sources like Famitsu in Japan or Edge in the UK; and sales figures, re-releases etc. in different countries. -- (talk) 19:22, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • The US-centric parts is merely in regards to WP:ENGVAR. One has to be picked, you can't go back and forth on it, and its not like I know how to write very good British English, so that's the way it goes when I rewrite an article. (Though it was already US-based even when I started with it I believe.)
Ah yes, I overlooked that. I don't think the "Mega Drive/Genesis" debate is an Eng/Var issue at all, frankly. -- (talk) 20:02, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • As far as the focus of the article goes, I'm all for expanding the Reception section, but I'd like to point out that it already has reviews from the Japan-based Famitsu and multiple UK based reviews like Sega Saturn Magazine and Sega Power. If you find more, feel free to add, but it took a lot of searching to muster up what's there as it is. Sergecross73 msg me 19:40, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Compromise Suggestion A narrative explanation may be the best solution, along the lines of the opening paragraph in the Sega article:
"Ristar, released as Ristar the Shooting Star (リスター・ザ・シューティングスター Risutā za Shūtingu Sutā?) in Japan, is a platform game developed by Sonic Team and published by Sega in 1995 for the Sega Genesis (known as the Mega Drive (メガドライブ Mega Doraibu) outside North America).

AndrewRT(Talk) 20:34, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

That might be the way to go, although I would say the wording of that is backwards to put a single regional variant first, then the rest of the world (including the country in which it was developed and initially released) in parenthesis. I'd propose:
"Ristar, released as Ristar the Shooting Star (リスター・ザ・シューティングスター Risutā za Shūtingu Sutā?) in Japan, is a platform game developed by Sonic Team and published by Sega in 1995 for the Sega Mega Drive (Genesis in North America).
-- (talk) 10:02, 2 June 2013 (UTC) (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
See WP:ENGVAR. The article has always been written in US English, so it wouldn't make sense to switch it to emphasize the non-US name. Sergecross73 msg me 15:46, 2 June 2013 (UTC))
This isn't an EngVar issue in that sense. EngVar refers to spellings, vocabulary, etc. Not to the actual names of things. Not only that but EngVar also specifies that when an article's topic is relevant to a particular country then that's country's terms get priority. So since this was a game developed and initially released in Japan "Mega Drive" should be the preferred term. -- (talk) 16:49, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Please read the whole thing, most notably the subsection WP:VNE. WP:ENGVAR is also used in relation to "terms" and " commonly understood word or phrase". So ENGVAR is definitely applicable, sorry. Sergecross73 msg me 16:56, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Then, as I said you also need to consider the fact that the variety of English used should reflect the subject matter. This is not an American game, it was developed and originally released in Japan where the term "Mega Drive" is used - along with the rest of the world outside North America. Also, please note the sentence "Universally used terms are often preferable to less widely distributed terms, especially in article titles" - "Mega Drive" is the more widely used and international term, whilst "Genesis" is specific to North America. -- (talk) 17:02, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • If we're talking about, for example, some obscure, Japan-only visual novel where highschoolers attend school in Tokyo or something, sure, then we should use something more region-centric. But there's nothing especially region-centric about this title. Sure, it was developed by a Japanese team, but it was release and localized in many different regions, and it's content (a non-anime based cartoon character jumping about in a level) is not especially region specific. (Its not like he's traveling through Tokyo or eating some British meal or something. Its all generic content.) With that established, there's no reason to change the variety of English used, as it always has been using US-based English, while, as established above, keeping a global viewpoint in its Reception and Development sections. It stays to how it was first established (and heavily rewritten.) Sergecross73 msg me 17:20, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Your quote about "universal terms" are irrelevant, as neither term is universal. That's all there really is to be said about that. Sergecross73 msg me 17:21, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
I disagree and reiterate both points that this is a Japanese game (and the article is even part of WikiProject Japan) and therefore "Mega Drive" gains priority name of the North America variant only term "Genesis", and that "Mega Drive" in general is a more universal term than Genesis - being used internationally, everywhere except a single region that couldn't use it due to copyright reasons. -- (talk) 17:29, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Something cannot be "more universal". Universal is all encompassing. Beyond that, that tired argument doesn't currently hold at the Sega Genesis article, nor should it here. Sergecross73 msg me 17:40, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm assuming you're conceding the argument about the topic being related to Japan then, since you didn't address that? "Universal" doesn't mean it has to apply to every single instance, the fact it applies to the vast majority of the world still qualifies "Mega Drive" as the universal term, whilst "Genesis" is only relevant to one specific region. What happens at the Genesis article isn't relevant, since there's no consensus over the article title there either, and it's currently in debate. -- (talk) 17:45, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
No, I absolutely don't concede that. Also, its not still up for debate at Sega Genesis. You've tried to re-open the debate, and every single response to you has been "No, we're not restarting this again". Sergecross73 msg me 17:48, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Actually it was another editor that re-opened the debate, I only expressed my thoughts after the fact. That article has been known as "Sega Mega Drive" or some variation or "Sega Mega Drive/Genesis" for much longer than it's been known simply as "Genesis". It's been named "Genesis" as that was the first name the article was known as (while it was still a stub) as no consensus was reached either way regarding what the name should be. -- (talk) 17:51, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
The debate hasn't been re-opened by anyone. If it were "re-opened", it'd be a huge production revolving around input from an WP:RFC, discussion at WP:VG, etc. What's happening right now is you and that other IP bickering about the name, while all the other Users that frequent the page, say "we're not re-opening the debate". Sergecross73 msg me 17:54, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Let it be known that, after I said this, the IP started up a new RFC at Sega Genesis just to prove a point. At the time of my original statement, that RFC hadn't been opened yet. It is ongoing. Sergecross73 msg me 18:57, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry you felt I started that RfC to prove a point, Sergecross. I genuinely thought you were suggesting I take the naming issue to that article. In any case, judging by the feedback, it seems it was a valid issue to request comment on. I trust that if a consensus is reached in favour of using "Mega Drive" as the article name you will be satisfied that we change the terminology from "Genesis" to "Mega Drive" in articles such as this as well, as this was your argument for the inverse (that this article should use "Genesis" as that was the term used in the console's article)? -- (talk) 21:13, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Well, that was only half of my argument, so no, but it doesn't seem to matter, as your efforts don't have consensus over there either. Please, lets stop wasting the community's time with these naming issues, and instead work on actually improving articles. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 02:39, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Note to closer - Just for clarity's sake, I wanted to point out that all the IPs (85x) here so far represent just one person, for the record. Legit or not, I just wanted to make sure proper weight on their argument was given. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 02:42, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Genesis As this is the English Wikipedia and the overwhelming majority of the sales in the English-speaking world were in North America, we should use the name it had here. Clarification about alternative names belongs in the article on the system, but it would be unnecessary here. I wouldn't be totally opposed to the initial mention having something like Andrew suggests, however.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 06:12, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Sega Genesis, mostly per WP:ENGVAR. ENGVAR relates to vocabulary, spelling, date formatting, and grammar - not just spelling, as the IP said above. It seems to me that "Megadrive" versus "Genesis" falls into the category of vocabulary, and as ENGVAR explicitly mentions vocabulary, I see no way that it would not apply here. However, we should also mention the Megadrive in the first instance, perhaps like this:

    Ristar, released as Ristar the Shooting Star (リスター・ザ・シューティングスター, Risutā za Shūtingu Sutā) in Japan, is a platform game developed by Sonic Team and published by Sega in 1995. It was released for the Sega Genesis (known as the Megadrive outside North America).

    We have guidelines that work along these lines for place names (see WP:PLACE), so I think it would make sense to do the same here. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 11:04, 18 June 2013 (UTC)


Staff for Ristar has no Sonic Team connections:

Game Planner: Akira Nishino, Takeshi Niimura Chief Designer: Takumi Miyake Character Designer: Yuji Uekawa Planet Designers: Koki Mogi, Kazuyuki Iwasawa, Mikiharu Ooiwa Character Voice: Eriko Hanada Music Composer: Tomoko Sasaki Sound Programmers: Hiroshi Kubota, Junya Kozakai Boss Programmer: Hiromasa Kaneko Player Programmer: Shigeru Yoshida Enemy Programmer: Naomi Hirai Effect Programmer: Takuya Matsumoto Project Director: Atsuhiko Nakamura Art Director: Yukio Sato Manual Director: Hiroyuki Mitsui Manual Designer: Yukiko Yahagi Manual Writer: Chieko Nakamura Test Players: Norihiro Sekine, Haruyuki Hashimoto, Hideki Yokaichiya Special Thanks to: Osamu Hori, Kenji Morita, Naofumi Hataya, Masashi Ogata, Naoko Hamada, Toshiko Arisaka, Rica Terajima, Ryoichi Hasegawa Producers: Hiroshi Aso, Makoto Oshitani, Yoji Ishii, Minoru Kanari - SOA Staff - Producer: Rhonda Van Assistant Producer: Erik Wahlberg Marketing Product Manager: Pamela Kelly Lead Tester: Marc Dawson Assistant Lead Tester: Lance Nelson Presented by: Sega Enterprises, Ltd.

The character designer being Yuji Uekawa (who did Sonic's redesign afterwards) is not enough, for it to be credited to Sonic Team.

--Tripple-ddd (talk) 14:03, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Sonic Retro is a fansite, and a Wiki itself. It is not a reliable source. It fails WP:USERG, its not usable. The IGN, GameSpot, and Nintendo World Report sources are all considered reliable per WP:VG/S.

Well the game has credits which don't come out of thin air, they are straight out of the game and not made up.--Tripple-ddd (talk) 14:40, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

The sources, and the development section, pretty clearly details their involvement though. I do agree that it shouldn't just be Sonic Team as developers, since a lot of "just Sega" staff worked on it, but its cited that Sonic Team was involved as well. I have added Sega to the dev field at least. Another thing to keep in mind: sometimes credits in video games were kind of weird when it came to Japanese video games. Developers were sometimes not credited, or credits under pseudonyms, for whatever reason. Sergecross73 msg me 14:45, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

The reviews you cite were written way after the fact as misinformed retro reviews, poorly written using rumored information. If you were to find reviews from the time, none would say Sonic Team. Sounds like you're just a Sonic Team fanboy rather than giving an objective eye to the development of the game. Check Mobygames or the actual game itself. You're being deliberately disingenuous if you think poorly researched retro reviews trump the actual credits.

Well can you provide us with such reviews then? Mobygames is not a reliable source, and the game only says "Presented by Sega Enterprises, LTD." Just name calling is not going to change anything. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 06:46, 8 February 2016 (UTC) This has multiple review scans from magazines in the 90s, official and otherwise. If you read all of them, there are absolutely no mentions of Sonic Team or ideas that it is from this supposed Rabbit prototype that it was based on (which Sonic was). Since then fanboys have incorrectly connected the dots in their own wikis which then Gamespot and IGN reused. Mobygames is a reflection of the original credits, no member, as said before by Tripple-ddd worked on the game outside of Yuji Uekawa. Notice Ristar Cluster, the biggest and only fansite, also never credits Sonic Team or links it to this rabbit prototype. The only known prototypes which are freely available as info even back in the 90s are Feel and subsequently Dexstar.

Not sure why anyone would credit poorly researched retro reviews who label all of these ideas as "legend" over the real deal official Sega magazines from 1995 and the actual game. Mobygames might not be reliable in your opinion but it's a reproduction of the credits in which you can cross reference every team member. Anything else and you are being intentionally obtuse. Just because you can reference retro reviews from Gamespot, IGN, and Nintendo Life (which is a dubious fan site) all regurgitating the same misinformation does not mean the editors of the online publications fact checked anything they said considering how old the game is and just being a rerelease review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:57, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Also to add to this, the big issue is with Sergecross73, who spreads his Sonic Team miscredits to the two Sonic related titles who share team credits with Ristar: Knuckles Chaotix and Sonic CD. Neither are games by Sonic Team, also officially developed by Sega and no more, and barely share any staff with Sonic 1, 2, and 3. If you check out the wikis for both of those games you will Sergecross73 also protecting the exact same misinformation. He controls these articles with poor sources and ignores actual game credits. You can't just say a game was developed by Sonic Team just because you feel like it or because some staff may have worked on something or other. Are you aware of the plethora of other games also simply credited to Sega Enterprises also sharing team members with Sonic Team? You wouldn't credit Altered Beast, Golden Axe, or Shen Mue to Sonic Team despite them also sharing team members sometimes. That makes very little sense and is not indicative of how game development works or how teams are established. It is fanboyism plain and simple and Sergecross73 should either be removed or learn how games are developed and properly credit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:36, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Tripple ddd, is that you? Sergecross73 msg me 11:39, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Also, where are you getting this stuff about Knuckles Chaotix and Sonic CD? I looked at those articles - I didn't see any talk page discussions where I said anything about them being developed by Sonic Team, and I checked the page history, and none of my 2015 edits at either page were to change the developer to Sonic Team. If this was something I was doing, it certainly wasn't recently or very actively... Sergecross73 msg me 20:12, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

GameSpot "90's Mascot" reference[edit]

I've seen a few drive-by editors remove this content a couple times now. What exactly is the problem? GameSpot is a reliable source. (See WP:VG/S.) The link works. I don't see any misrepresentation between what the source says, and what the content in the article says. I don't understand what there is to object about it? I could see maybe wanting to put it in the Reception section or something, but nobody appears to be doing that, they're just deleting it outright... Sergecross73 msg me 12:35, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, not sure. It fits in the legacy section, is properly sourced, and doesn't seem to violate anything from WP:GAMECRUFT or any other guideline, AFAIK. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 23:00, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, it's not even really that big of a deal, it's almost more that I'm curious. I mean, its not like its even making a controversial claim or something. It's not claiming it was "better than Super Mario , or "as bad as Bubsy 3D" or something bold like that. It's just saying GameSpot liked the game and wished it would make a return. Sergecross73 msg me 19:45, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

MC/GR Source[edit]

Sega Forever[edit] - Very likely to be added to the service/ mobile release line this week. Doens't need to be added yet, but adding as a reminder to do so in the next few days, when its likely to be confirmed. Sergecross73 msg me 13:30, 9 August 2017 (UTC)