Talk:The 3rd Birthday

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


SQUARE ENIX presents DKΣ3713 Private Party 2008 confirms 3rd birthday for the Playstation Portable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:55, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The trailer shows the short tagline "8 years after Parasite Eve II". This does not necessarily mean that the game story will be set 8 years after PE2. A trailer for Final Fantasy XII once had the line "5 years after FFX" and yet it's obvious that they were talking about the release date in the real world, not the date of the game within FFX's fictional history. Kariteh 15:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I altered the section describing fans as "erroneously referring" to the game as "Parasite Eve III." The name "Parasite Eve III" basically satisfies the condition for the description of "third game in the Parasite Eve series," even if it is not, strictly speaking, the name. Maybe a word that isn't as strong as "erroneous" is in order... —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:57, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

    • Maybe "erroneously" might be a bit of a strong word, but calling it PE3 is wrong. It might be the third game in the Parasite Eve universe, but it isn't a direct sequel. Look at the Resident Evil Series, the real Resident Evil 4 would actually be Code Veronica wouldn't it? And the prequel Resident Evil 0 would actually be the real Resident Evil 5. (and then I don't even bother to count the Dead Aim series) Even more so with this game, from what I've heard it might not even be "canon" but may actually happen in an alternative timeline/reality.Thronedrei (talk) 02:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Japan only?[edit]

Is this game going to be released in Japan only? Has this information been released yet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 05:01, 26 August 2008

I played this game. It was very nice but the language was Japanese. I heard the English version will be released by march. -- (talk) 11:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Link fixes[edit]

Noted that most of the citations are not done using "Cite web". Needs to be fixed. Ominae (talk) 08:25, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Tad Bit of Controversy?[edit]

There's been a good bit of controversy regarding the spin-off, mainly due to its complete change in gameplay formula. A user on YouTube, ZacharyZoomer, has managed to start a small amount of said controversy, and has later cited the results of the merger as the most probable cause. It continues to grow.

I was wondering if this controversy should be mentioned in the article. -- (talk) 15:26, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I actually saw the video in question and that comment. Just over 7000 views on YT, though, suggests that, even if he has a point, this isn't the fandom crying out in pain over some atrocity of game design. We'll see what the critical reception to the game is when it (finally) comes out in December. Axem Titanium (talk) 01:50, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to add on that unless people are rioting in the streets, it's not really notable either way. Dfsghjkgfhdg (talk) 04:56, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Or is it? Fan reception is also important, and 7000 views isn't bad for a game that, let's face it, isn't that well-known. For now, we should wait until the game is released. Robert Berkshire (talk) 01:42, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
That's still a big negative. Fan reception is notable if it can be documented. 7,000 views is not much in my opinion, but what would be important for establishing if it was would be some sort of YouTube analyst claiming that it is; Wikipedia doesn't include OR. In addition to that, it should be considered that 7,000 views of a video doesn't mean 7,000 people voicing that opinion or even caring about its content after watching, and, as I said already, even if they did all hold that view, I imagine it'll ship more than 7,000 units, in which case their opinion is not really special in the spectrum of opinions that would sure to be had. Dfsghjkgfhdg (talk) 08:52, 29 September 2010 (UTC) Would this be the user in question? If so, I can find no such "controversy." Robert Berkshire (talk) 23:36, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

The controversy should be documented. If you can quote a random website like GameZone praising the game, you can quote a full-fledged and well-known review site like RPGamer that points out everything from the disgust with the development team treating Aya like a sex object to making her act completely out of character before players find out everything they would at the end of the game. (talk) 19:20, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Survival horror?[edit]

is this officially classified as a survival-horror game, or is that a consensus? having played the game, it didn't seem like it had survival-horror elements, but rather was just a tactical 3rd-person shooter.

Beginning Paragraph Spoiler[edit]

The first or second paragraph, regarding who the player controls, revealed a huge spoiler in regards to Aya's true nature in this game - those who have either played the game or read the Plot description will know what I'm talking about. It simply doesn't make sense for such a thing to be revealed that early on the page, especially when that part of the page is for general information. If someone wants to know about such a critical tidbit of the storyline - one which is revealed mere moments before the game's close and could be described as the game's largest plot twist - they can read the Plot description. Otherwise, I fear you would be spoiling the game for individuals who are simply looking for information.

I've already changed it, but folks are welcome to discuss changing it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:08, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

File:The 3rd Birthday Bride.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]


An image used in this article, File:The 3rd Birthday Bride.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 5 June 2012

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

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:The 3rd Birthday Bride.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:03, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Notes on the rewrite[edit]

Quick question about the current wording of the part about "Overdrive". The article says that her consciousness can jump to different bodies in order to avoid too much damage/dying in her own body. I was just curious as to the repercussions of this. Is her old/original body still left open for damage after she leaves? Does the player need to go retrieve the body eventually? How long does the player stay in the new body? Indefinitely? Time-limit? For the level? I imagine whatever the answer is, it's probably an aspect of the gameplay design that may be worth mentioning, even if very briefly. Sergecross73 msg me 16:34, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

@Sergecross73:, I've done a rewrite to better define how Overdive works, as well as how it is very much tied into the NPC system. Hope it looks better. --ProtoDrake (talk) 17:23, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, the new additions help understanding the concept quite a bit, thanks. One last question on this - what happens to the "Aya body" when she jumps into another body. Does the computer AI take her over? Does her body disappear? Something else? Other than that the concept makes complete sense now. Sergecross73 msg me 18:04, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Said what controls the soldiers when Aya isn't using them, and if you want me to explain Overdive completely, you might as well turn this into a dedicated wiki page, because it's complicated, and a gameplay-story fusion that I haven't seen anywhere else. That's part of the problem with this bloody game. Why couldn't they make it a straight action RPG --ProtoDrake (talk) 19:14, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Apologies, I must have misread it. Sorry, I wasn't trying to move it into game guide territory. Sergecross73 msg me 19:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Overall, the article looks really. Like usual, I only made a few minor changes to wording or typos, nothing of substance was changed, as it was already in good shape. One final question - it says the goal was 500,000 copies sold. There's Japan figures, but none in any other regions - I assume its because those figures were never released? I know its hard to get concrete figures for NA/EU games unless they're million-sellers, and I thought that this game underperformed, so I imagine they're just not out there. I could look around too. I thought I read once that Square-Enix's 2011 games on PSP under-performing, like this and the Tactics Ogre remake, is what lead them to not translate Type 0 on the PSP, but that may have just been speculation too... Sergecross73 msg me 12:48, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

I looked up and down and all around for total sales figures, but found nothing that I could cite here. It's generally accepted that it sold under a million copies worldwide, so I highly doubt anyone would have taken note of that. Oh, and the PSP game sales wasn't exactly what caused Type-0 to be delayed until Type-0 HD, it was international platform sales, not the poor sales of individual games, that brought a halt to localization. --ProtoDrake (talk) 13:49, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
That's what I figured. And yeah, thinking back, I don't think that this game in particular was singled out for halting Type 0 PSP in English, but rather, the general collapse of the PSP market around that time... Sergecross73 msg me 14:20, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:The 3rd Birthday/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 21:23, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

I should complete this by tomorrow at the latest Jaguar 21:23, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Initial comments[edit]

  • "It was released in 2010 in Japan and 2011 in North America and Europe" - release dates could be more specific to each region, but this is just a suggestion
  • "creatures known as the Twisted have appeared from beneath Manhattan and decimated the city" - Manhattan isn't a city, would it sound better being replaced with "New York City" or creatures known as the Twisted have appeared from beneath Manhattan and decimated New York City?
  • The lead summarises the article well so this meets the GA criteria
  • "Aya can receive briefings for missions, view additional documents, and buy and customize new weapons" - no need for this extra "and" here
  • "When activated, Aya entered "Liberation Mode", a state enabling her to move around the battlefield" - why is this in past tense?
  • "a company created by former Capcom staff members who had first worked on the high-definition remaster of Rez" - this part has no citation
  • Is there no track list for the Music section?
  • "Reorchestrations of two pieces of classical music" - should have a hyphen


  • No dead links, though I don't know what's happened to the European and North American external links...

Close - promoted[edit]

Honestly I could find nothing wrong with this article that would have made this be put on hold, so I'll promote this straight away. The above points I found were mostly minor prose issues, though I would recommend addressing them if you want to FAC this. Some minor points included a sentence being in past tense and no specific release dates in the lead, but other than that this was a great article. Its comprehensiveness and good prose makes it a Good Article, well done Good article Jaguar 18:53, 23 April 2015 (UTC)