Talk:Tales of Vesperia

EU and NA release date?

Ive seen someone revert an [unconfirmed] tag on those release dates when someone else added it, citing it as vandalism. However not a single source has been given on the fact that there is even going to be a EU an NA release, thus thus the [unconfirmed] tag was in place imo.Jack Masamune (talk) 08:37, 15 July 2010 (UTC) gamefaqs lists it as tba i believe. gamefaqs list the playstation 3 version as canceled.

The improper criticism by 92.237.14.190

The sources to the criticism section are unreliable sources per WP:RS, consisting of fansites, blogs, and other non-usable sources. Inappropriate content that is deliberately defamatory of the company and game and violates WP:NPOV as well. That is why it was removed. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 22:37, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

If we've determined that to be the case does this really still need to be locked? Damned jumped up admins. -_- --71.229.66.161 (talk) 02:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Nah, they were just doin they're job. I think its fine like this. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 05:50, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually I see one of the links posted gives a reference to Kotaku, they are a pretty credible site that I've seen used around the Wiki. The information is definitely true, why not include it? Because it didn't come from nbc? SethanHair (talk) 17:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Because their information was based off a blog. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 18:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Most of his links came directly from Sankaku Complex, which is a blog and they are notorious for twisting words, to make half-truths and to even just completely lie in their stories. Even if blogs were trustworthy, SC wouldn't be. --71.229.66.161 (talk) 23:11, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Sankaku Complex is not a reliable source nor a appropriate site to link to and should be avoided if possible, blogs are also not really reliable unless proven credible.
Sites like Kotaku have responsible reporting which is well recognised by the gaming community to the same extent as other sites like GameSpot. Also Abyssal Chronicles are one of the few sites that really report on the Tales series which is not really easy to get news on due to the nature of the series, they have also so far proven themselves to be reliable even though they are a "fansite". Hence I feel that these are two sources that can be easily referenced to when it comes to the aspect of sources.
However I feel that the criticism section should be deleted due to its high unreliability as well as not much added value to this page.KiasuKiasiMan (talk) 14:05, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the criticism section was lacking in depth. It was basically confirming bits of data found on the game and angry Xbox fans. If its criticism, it should be placed in the reception and it should be about the gameplay and such. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 18:12, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to unprotect the article based on the agreement in this thread. I think also it's been long enough that we can assume 92.237 has noticed and opted not to join in, which is his loss. Thx. – Steel 16:31, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually I gave up because because despite a petition and posts right from the mouths of the horses (angry 360 players), it seems like certain people don't want it being acknowledged on this page, like it tarnishes something. It is "critism" of the PS3 version and added content, it belonged where it did and it is noteworthy as another one of Namco's vastly upgraded ports, even more so given the content vastly changes the game. But it seems as if people see more fit to ignore that it should be there so I didn't bother going on. 92.237.14.190 (talk) 10:35, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't be so paranoid. Its because you never posted a reliable source. Of course they would be people angry and I don't care of this page is tarnished in that way, but those are unofficial petition and do not currently hold encyclopedic notability. The port already has been released, the efforts of the angry players has not swayed Namco at all. No notabilty. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 19:17, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Possible English localization for PlayStation 3

According to this article; http://scrawlfx.com/2009/09/tales-of-vesperia-voice-actors-being-called-back-to-studio there might be a possible localization for Tales of Vesperia on PlayStation 3. Since the voice actors were called back for more recordings on moves and artes, It could be a PS3 port. Or perhaps downloadable content for the XBOX 360 version (maybe even an expansion?). This is just me guessing.--Timon1771 (talk) 23:40, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Leave out the original research. Does Abyssal Chronicles meet the requirements as a reliable source? DragonZero (talk · contribs) 01:57, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Blogs are not usually considered to be reliable sources, and there is nothing to back up that story as true. Granted there have been plenty of sources for this story, but it isn't nearly enough to warrant changing information on this page. --71.229.66.190 (talk) 02:29, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Since when was Abyssal Chronicles a blog? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.106.40.175 (talk) 00:07, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Voice Actors

Anyone got sources for the English ones? DragonZero (talk · contribs) 23:10, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

atari wrongly listed as european publisher

i have the european version myself. it only say namco and namco bandai games. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.74.217 (talk) 12:54, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Unmentioned Characters

Can someone explain to me why so many characters are missing from the list? To name one missing character, the knight Sodia. Nobody has even mentioned her. Why? She does play a slightly important role in the plotline as she does try to murder Yuri. --Posted by a concerned Tales fan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.166.245.228 (talk) 18:45, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tales of Vesperia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: PresN (talk · contribs) 21:42, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Reviewing... --PresN 21:42, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

• "but has yet to receive a localization" -> "but has yet to receive an English localization"
• "walking or running along a fixed axis, freely running around the battlefield, jump in any direction, guard against attacks, and pause the battle to select a different enemy to attack" - tense shift halfway form verb-ing to verb
• In the lead, you have blastia as capitalized, but lowercase in Setting
• "Vesperia was initially planned as a title for the PlayStation 2. In response, the executives at Namco Bandai said" - "in response"? Like, the Vesperia team announced that it was for the PS2, and in response to that announcement Bandai said no it wasn't?
• You should mention when Symphonia and Abyss were released ("during the later development stages of Tales of the Abyss (2005).", "same group that developed Tales of Symphonia (2003)"
• "Arrangements of "Ring a Bell" are used in some tracks in the main soundtrack, but the song itself is not included" - in the main soundtrack album, you mean?
• "It was announced for a 2008 overseas release in February 2008, along with its release on the Xbox 360" - at this point you've only talked about the X360 release, so how is the English X360 release "along with" the X360 release?
• "Alongside the standard release, the game was packaged with an Xbox 360 Premium Edition that launched alongside the standard edition" - double alongside the standard release
• "Speaking on why the port was being developed, a developer who worked on Vampire Rain, said" - no comma after Rain; maybe just "Speaking on why the port was being developed, a developer for Vampire Rain"
• "first developed for the Xbox 360 [...], then porting to PS3" - tense
• "As pat of his review,"
• "120,176 units" - too details; round to the nearest thousand for these
• "26 August launch [...] May 28, 2010." - you do month-day everywhere in the text besides that August one, but do day-month in the references. They don't need to be consistent with each other (though it's odd), but they should be consistent within the article/references.
• "five manga adaptations: one anthology, one traditional adaptations" - adaptations, and also, anthology of what? Anthology is just a collection
• "A voiced novel adaptation [...], began release" - began? So is it an episodic novel?
• Ref 74 - "Retrieved August 16, 2014." - double check that you're consistent with date types.
• Pretty darn good, overall! Placing on hold. --PresN 22:28, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

@PresN: I've addressed all the cited concerns, I think. Forgot how difficult Tales articles could be at GA, but at least this one was released overseas. I've got a Japan-exclusive one to deal with next! --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:45, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Alright, passed! --PresN 14:04, 21 November 2015 (UTC)