Talk:Tales of Graces

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Tales of Graces 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 27, 2013 Good article nominee Listed
July 30, 2013 Featured article candidate Not promoted
Current status: Good article
WikiProject Video games (Rated GA-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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Anime and manga (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
Wikipe-tan good article.png This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime and manga related articles 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 assessment scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Seamless overworld[edit]

Maybe the article should indicate that Tales of Hearts already had a seamless overworld (but gave players the option to use a traditional overworld map as well).

No. Not notable in this article to mention DragonZero (talk · contribs) 00:14, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Well, if not, then the phrase "unlike previous Tales" should be removed, as it is inaccurate. The feature was introduced in Tales of Hearts.
Then do it. "Unlike previous Tales" was very unprofessional and should not have been here in the first place. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 02:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
I rephrased the sentence, including the information that Tales of Hearts already had that feature, plus the phrase "players can now freely travel between dungeons, towns, etc." was confusing, in my opinion (as with an overworld map, you can also travel "freely"). It should now be more clear that the travel between locations is not done via a separated overworld map mode, but rather using location/level geometry just like dungeons or towns. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:51, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Main Character's name?[edit]

I'm kinda confused about the name. I've seen it as Asvel and Asbel. Which one is right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:09, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

We won't really know until an official spelling is released. All we know is that it's written アスベル (asuberu) which can be taken several ways. Even the last name ラント (ranto) can. (talk) 05:52, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Single Player?[edit]

Is the game confirmed to be single player? If not, then can someone change it to TBA or something? Wouldn't want people to get the wrong idea..... (talk) 04:36, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

What is a "Characteristic Genre Name"[edit]

I've seen it in most of the Tales Of... pages, but I have no idea what it means. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:10, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

It's the "motto" of each Tales entry, usually used to promote the game.

North American Release?[edit]

Someone apparently believes that a North American release is assured because they put down an NA release as a TBA. While it is true there is an English version to the opening, it does not mean there will be a localization, but it might be a decent sign. Has there been any other hopeful proof about a North American localization? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Someone put in that the PS3 version was confirmed. I removed it because, while it looks likely, all I've seen so far is the logo blurred out, shouldn't we wait until Namco Bandai actually gives a press release and a system for the North American localization? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:13, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

European Release?[edit]

It is stated in this article that this game will be released in summer 2012. Is there any reason why states this will be released in December 2012?

Source: (talk) 21:52, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

No mention of the bug?[edit]

Apparently there are numerous bugs that causes ToG to hang during gameplay or even crash the console. Yet I see no mention of those things here. ReshenKusaga (talk) 22:00, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any reliable sources that confirm that there are bugs? MS (Talk|Contributions) 22:28, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

There was recently a recall for this game because of those bugs, so it looks like they were a pretty big concern. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:18, 27 February 2010 (UTC) (talk) 10:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Great for one sentence. "Due to several bugs in the game, Namco of Japan issued a recall of the game and allowed players to send in their copy of the game in exchange for an updated version." Now someone can figure out where your suppose to stick this sentence. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 10:45, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Battle System[edit]

Is the battle system turn-based or realtime? The article makes no mention of this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Casey J. Morris (talkcontribs) 19:01, 22 October 2010 (UTC) Real time. All but one Tales game has a real time battle system, I think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:04, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Graces F (U.S) boxart.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]


An image used in this article, File:Graces F (U.S) boxart.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 01:06, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Main Cover Art for this article[edit]

By default usually the North American Cover Art of a game is used as the one in the infobox. But in this case the only North American Cover Art we have is the Tales of Graces f one. Hence I'm proposing that we shift the current box art to the development section as the original one used in the Wii version and place the NA Cover Art in the infobox.KiasuKiasiMan 03:39, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I support this. I imagine this article will eventually be mostly based off the "F" version anyways, with it being the only version in English and this being the English Wikipedia... Sergecross73 msg me 15:13, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Is that really necessary? There are other games which had remakes as the first version released do not use the original cover. Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney as well as the second and thrid game in the series uses the English cover from the DS remake and not the cover from the GBA orginals since that was never release in English. Also neither the 5th or 6th Dragon Quest's use the original Japanese covers from the Super Famicom but the first officially released English cover which were from the DS remakes.-- (talk) 06:55, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Well, we don't have to, but it'd be very easy to considering both covers are already in the article, they'd just need their placements changed. Also, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, just because those random articles did it doesn't mean it's right, it's not like you just reference WP:GA's or something... Sergecross73 msg me 15:38, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Old version[edit]

The old version of the article is located at Talk:Tales of Graces/version 2. Jenks24 (talk) 09:53, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

RPG to Know the Strength to Protect[edit]

Its central theme is Mamoru Tsuyosa wo Shiru RPG (守る強さを知るRPG?, lit. "RPG to Know the Strength to Protect"). Does this make sense to anyone? And does it warrant even being in the article, let alone right there in the second paragraph? -masa 20:54, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I kept it in because the game company or producers hold it in high regards. The producer of the game stated during the production of each game in the series, a theme, like the one you quoted, is what the story develops around. Those themes are even shown right below the yen pricetag on their official pages of each respective game. In Tales of Graces' case, they even spent a Jump Festa revealing the game's theme; its theme was also brought up again in Tales of Xillia 2's reveal trailer. The Tales (series) article should be explaining this but I haven't had the time to thoroughly research or edit it. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 21:54, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
I've been working on the Tales series articles a lot lately, and I've been debating on what to do about these "theme names" or whatever. On one hand, they seems to be almost like an extension of the title for the Japanese releases, but on the other hand, they're always dropped/not emphasized in their English language releases, and always have really bad literal translations that kind of confusing, especially considering we're supposed to be writing Wikipedia for a "general audience"-type that doesn't have much prior knowledge on the subject. One idea I've had is to make mention of them in the development section or something. I may also start a discussion at WP:VG regarding it as well. Sergecross73 msg me 19:24, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Promotional crossover[edit]

Tales of Graces had a crossover with .hack//Link in the form of a DVD titled .hack//Link Special DVD that shows Asbel interacting Haseo. The reference is here but I couldn't find any section where it could be added. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 01:04, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I added it to the characters. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 01:28, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the reception "spoiler"[edit]

Yo. First off, my initial edit to cover up the spoiler in the reception section of the article was mainly intended as a knee-jerk attempt at a joke although admittedly it was going too far with it. I apologize for the trouble.

That said, while I fully understand Wikipedia's aim to describe subjects in detail, you mentioned how the "plot" section serves as a warning that the article will give plot details away. The problem with this is that this involves the game's reception rather than the plot. I've been spoiled by taking peeks at plot descriptions and "List of characters" articles before, but I was under the impression that the reception sections focused more on the scores provided and detailing satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the general execution of the gameplay/graphics/story rather than going into anything specific. You say how readers will want to find out more on the subject, but in the case of someone interested in purchasing the game, I doubt they'd want to know right off the bat who the main villain is. Why not just keep that confined to the plot section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:38, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Cause that whole section was the reception towards the plot. Besides, the main villain is revealed early on. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 04:45, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Red Phoenix (talk · contribs) 18:19, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

I will review this article. It seems that it has sat at WP:GAN for over two months now, and it's a shame that it's had to, because as I read it, it does appear quite well-written. Let's take a look at how it breaks down and come up with a result.

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Very well written all across the board, and meets both 1a and 1b. I have a couple of slight concerns with the length of the plot and character listing, per MOS:FICTION, and the use of short paragraphs with their own subheadings in the Media adaptations section, per MOS:PARAGRAPHS. However, after having read them over a couple of times, I would say that the plot is fairly well balanced given the genre of the game, as well as the amount of gameplay, development, and reception info; and that the short paragraphs are just long enough to meet the manual of style guidelines. These might be concerns raised at WP:FAC if this article can make it that far, but in my opinion it does satisfy the GA criteria for the time being.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Checklinks reveals no dead links, and as I perused the sources, everything appears to be from reliable sources. I had to doublecheck, but it does appear to be a reliable source. Again, though I believe it meets the GA criteria at this time, I might suggest one or two slight changes. First, with having so many references in so many categories, it may make sense to add columns to the subsections to help make the references more legible in what might be considered a wall of text, and secondly I might suggest changing either the notation "Game X" or the subheading "Primary references". Though it is apparent to me that these are for the game, which is listed, and clicking a "Game X" link takes one to the reference, one may not catch that and wonder what it refers to, so maybe a citation such a "P1, P2..." etc. might be a suggestion for that, just something which makes it easier on the reader to make the correlation.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Slightly concerned about the plot and character length, but it doesn't appear to be overly detailed. Again, might be a concern at FAC, but I believe it makes the GA criteria at this time.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    Looks to be quite neutral. Reception section illustrates good balance.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    Looks very stable.
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Both images are fair use, and rationales are provided. Given that this is an article about a copyrighted work, I don't see more pictures going in unless someone can get their hands on a free image of a developer, or something of the sort, and even then such would add little to the article.
  7. Overall:
    Very well written! An excellent job. Despite my concerns, I do believe this pretty clearly does meet the GA criteria at this time, and I hope the feedback I've given will help out in pushing this article up to FAC. Keep up the great work!

Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 18:46, 27 May 2013 (UTC)