Talk:Hellgate: London

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of Low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.

Contents


This article is more about diablo II than hellgate, the word diablo is mentioned around 20 times and the word hellgate is mentioned around 14 times. This article is complete garbage, its a disgrace that this article is not flagged to be completely re-written. 220.238.123.44 10:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Multiplayer free?

I heard they were charging for this, either way it should probably be explicatively stated in the article.

Its made by the some of the guys that made Diablo 2 so it should have free online gaming.

[edit] Copyrighted content?

Hmm, the Factsheet in this article is identical to the equivalent part written here: http://www.rpgcodex.com/gamedetails.php?id=329. Now, the question is just -- did they copy Wikipedia (then it's no problem), or did an editor here copy that page? Another thing pointing towards someone having been paste happy around here is that we see common lack-of-editing issues from pasting, like this:

"Character Classes Fight against the demons of the underworld as one of several unique character classes."

"Hell on Earth Battle against a wide variety of demonic enemies"

The list goes on and on, and as you can see, there are no periods separating the "Character Classes" above from the sentences, making me believe much of this was blantantly ripped from a web site where the layout and font styles used was lost. The large bulk of content in question came all at once here, only 3 minutes after this edit from the same author. So it must be either pre-written or taken from somewhere with or without permission. Can someone clarify what this "Factsheet" is all about for me, preferrably the author? Copyrighted content from other web sites in articles here is a serious matter. -- Jugalator 18:12, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Removed the content for now, replaced it with the possible copyright violation template. Jacoplane 19:22, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
Updating with pointer to http://www.hellgateguru.com/factsheet.php, since I now believe that's where it came from originally. That fan site also had that exact text, and the same editor did at the same edit session as this add an external link to the hellgateguru.com fansite. Also, this time even the section name "Factsheet" matches. It could be the webmaster giving us the rights to use this freely as a nice gesture, but it could be someone entirely else; I've only got an IP address of the editor too. I'll see if I can contact the guys at hellgatguru.com and resolve this one to either add back the content if we have permission, or permanently remove the content. Thanks for showing me there's a violation template for these things; I seem to have missed that myself. -- Jugalator 13:50, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
OK, the copyright owner is Sol Invictus, site admin of HellgateGuru.com who took the liberity to improve the article as he thought it looked a bit sparse. So by posting it here himself, I assume he's complying to the GNU License and everything is fine. I'll add it back now and update the Copyright Issues article accordingly. He used to be of RPG Codex staff too, so that explains why they have the content as well! -- Jugalator 17:22, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Article or Shill?

I find it hard to feel like a game that hasn't shipped yet can really be deemed noteworthy. This feels less like a legitimate article and more like a shill.

Many, many games that are not yet released have an article on wikipedia. They contain the (sometimes sparse, agreed) information that has been gathered from various different sources. I think it can't be denied that this is useful and fits the criteria for a good article. Theroachman 06:14, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm behind quite a few edits in this article and sure hope I'm not endorsing the game, but keeping it NPOV. :-) I try to keep it all at an informal level, and the least I want is to appear as a shill. The intention is simply to have a good article base for when the game is released, by using content revealed already by now. One section I believe look a bit biased and out of place is the "fact sheet" at the bottom of the article. It was added by a fansite owner early on to give the article some substance, but I think it's starting to feel it has at least partially played out its role a bit with less "ad" feeling material available elsewhere now. I'm personally a bit unsure what to do with it (merge with other content?) as I don't want to lose information, and that's why I haven't done anything to it yet. I do believe this game by now has enough factual content revealed for an encyclopedia article though. -- Jugalator 01:19, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
I refer you to the article on Diablo II in wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_II (or check out Moby Games if you prefer a more objective source, http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/diablo-ii/credits). The credits list cites Stieg Hedlund as the designer of that game, so statements like: "... not only worked on, but were the principle designers and visionaries of the Diablo series." might be overreaching, as well as sounding suspiciously like marketing speak.
perhaps that is a little over the top without any sources, but even then it's far from calling it an ad. just look around wiki there are many articles on upcomming games, some with way less chance of actually finishing then this one. Boneyard 14:20, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
That's a bit of a race-to-the-bottom argument, that just doesn't hold water for me. Removing bias seems to be a pretty hot-button issue for wikipedia, and while I'm positive there are other instances, and likely even more egregious ones, you have to start somewhere.
I'm well aware of the machine generated MobyGames database. :-) I've now made a round of edits in attempts to make it more NPOV, so please check it out and comment if you're still concerned about some sentences, or else I'll remove the NPOV tag in a while. Thanks for your input! :-) -- Jugalator 21:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
It's considerably better. I'm still not sure about "luminary" Roper, but thanks for listineing to my feedback.
You've got the wrong Kenneth Williams, and even if you had the right one, I'm not sure he's notable.
I've edited the intro paragraph and rewrote it for some reasons. First, explained what all people did before more precisely in turn to explain why this game share Diablo's spirit in a number of ways. Also, removed "game industry luminary" bias and tried to make it more clear that the persons listed were co-founders of FSS, and not all creators of the Diablo series (Ken Williams wasn't). I thought myself it was a bit unclear on this before. Also changed "include" to "are", because these are all founders, not a subset. -- Jugalator 17:55, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Technically Eric and Dave created the Diablo series. Max and the others did not. Max was working on an unreleased football title for most of the development of Diablo, Ken had nothing to do with game development and Bill was in Irvine, and could be said to have influenced Diablo's creation, but even that's a stretch.
OK, I made it more accurate according to this info. -- Northgrove 07:22, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Can I remove the Fact Sheet?

The fact sheet is basically just emotional advertising for this game with no real encyclopaedic value or content. Ok if I remove it?

  1. Remove it! There is no fact sheet in an encyclopedia that is written in an imperative style. --87.123.58.192 17:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, the fact sheet was just put here by a webmaster while this article was otherwise considerably lacking information, but now I think the rest had outgrown the quality of that part and it felt out of place in an article like this to me. -- Northgrove 18:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Based items

"Hellgate: London will heavily use a randomized item system of at least about 100 base items, with a pool of random special properties applied to them, to achieve replayability and promote item collection."

Just a question, what does this mean. I am sure this dosent mean there will only be 100 items?

It means there will be 100 base items like differnt guns and armor types. But every item should have differnt +stats or damage/armor values. Like you might get 2 of the same "shotgun" weapon but one will deal more damage or have differnt buffs on it. It will be very much like the item system of Diablo but it is still early to for it to be finalized.--70.17.203.220 17:21, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

There are no 100 based item, but 100 based weapons! Just answering your questions.

[edit] Source Code stolen

Ivan confirmed that HGL source code was stolen but that the incident wouldnt delay the game. Asososocrates

I wonder if this is a notable enough incident in this game's history to be brought up in the article. Possibly under a section like "Source code incident" or something. But if so little information about this has been released that we can just post a sentence on it or so based on a news site, maybe it's not of much use. -- Northgrove 18:31, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
No, he has not confirmed that the HGL source code was stolen. It was an unverified rumor that was later quashed when no further news about the 'code theft' surfaced. It's been several months now. There's no need to post up what amounts to little more than a rumor started by an uncredible news site. -- 219.93.175.66 11:40, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Guilds?

Should this article even have a guild section? Isn't that basically an invitation to link spam? Are game community groups really encyclopedic? -- Northgrove 18:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest removing the guild section. It's unnecessary and there are far more guilds than those listed on this wiki. As you said, a guild section is an open invitation to spam, as once the game enters beta or is released, there are bound to be dozens of new entries -- 219.93.175.66 11:42, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Characters comparation with Diablo 2

" The first is a melee-combat type character referred to as the "Templar". This character is similar to the "Barbarian" character in Diablo 2. "

Wouldn't that be the Paladin? Since the Templar will have auras and such.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.225.191.178 (talk) 17:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC).

It's actually a combination of both the Templar and Barbarian classes. Aesthetically, it's similar to the Templar, but in terms of how the class is played - it's a lot like a Barbarian when it comes to active skills and attacks. SolInvictus 22:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)