Talk:Mount&Blade
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Screenshots
The screenshots are from v0.751, the game is now on v0.808 and the graphics and GUI have changed. The screenshots need to updated in order to show this.
[edit] Crouched lance?
I'm fairly sure it's couched lance, not crouched lance. Tzarius 07:49, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
No problem, sire! I am sure you are right. I write all these out of my own memeories, believe or not, cause I am currently at my workplace. Anyway thanks for fixing my horrible gramma and spelling mistakes. Please continue to add more material.
It is couched lance.--PrinceScamp 04:18, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
And deals over 200 Damage when couched and properly aimed.Enough to kill a Knight and his fully-armored Charger.--CAN T 22:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
Heh heh, yeah. Good times. --PrinceScamp 19:43, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Dual wielding
One very minor thing: "dual wielding" has an entry here and is revelant (RPG). I am not sure if the link should be removed. GriffinCheng 08:00, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
There is no dual wielding in the game. --PrinceScamp 04:11, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Length?
Personally, I feel this article is a bit too long, but I'm not sure which bits are unnecessary. Any thoughts? Naar
I guess the current strength are: calvary combat, immersive combat experience, open-ended gameplay concentrated on role-playing but not gimmiks. Also, it is done by a very small team of developers with a little fan-based support. I guess the article should reflect these properties which is unique in current market and also make it worthwhile.
I have shorten some portions I find unecessary. I hope in the future, someone could rewrite "Combat" section for better highlight. Or drop "Trading" or just incorporate part of it into "Story and Background". Untill another version release, see ya! Thank you. GriffinCheng 08:00, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Move to Mount&Blade
- Move. Straightforward: the game's name doesn't contain spaces. No official source has it containing spaces. For those of you not familiar with Wikiquette, you're supposed to vote yes or no on this so the administrators can see that there's a consensus to move the page. Also, sign your name by typing four tildes: ~~~~ —Simetrical (talk) 05:24, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Do Not Move. The game designer is not a native English speaker, so I don't think we should be slaves to strict literalism.Naar 10:54, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
-
- Don't you think that's a bit patronizing? Omission of spaces is certainly a valid stylistic choice in principle; that someone is a non-native speaker shouldn't invalidate their stylistic choices, surely? A name is a name . . . —Simetrical (talk) 10:07, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
-
- No, I don't see it that way. To be fair to the developer, his English is far better than my Turkish. However, you must have noticed that the game contains quite an amount of typos, odd word choices and grammatical mistakes. In my opinion, this also extends to the title. I think it's better to bring these to his attention rather than passing them off as stylistic choices. Naar June 28, 2005 09:19 (UTC)
-
- So then if the developer is informed that the normal format includes spaces, and he still wants the name to remain without, you'll change your vote? (It's a moot point for the time being, since he's vacationing, but for when he gets back.) —Simetrical (talk) 29 June 2005 14:52 (UTC)
-
- Yes, if it actually is a deliberate choice, then changing the article to Mount&Blade with Mount & Blade redirecting to it would be the right thing to do. I'll still find it rather odd, though. Naar June 29, 2005 19:40 (UTC)
- Move Again, it is the game's actual name. Robmods 18:51, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I've done the move - article names should be their 'correct' title. Talrias (t | e | c) 19:53, 9 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] M&B
- This acronym is by no means official (nor widely accepted), so I expanded it to Mount&Blade. Also the article suggested the game run on any Microsoft Windows version, which is not true. --Cbb 07:53, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Btw, the forum user Jaghatai Khan is ftw. --Doktor Illuminasyon 22:20, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Gameplay section NPOV
The gameplay section mentions "advanced AI which allows each soldier to act as a complete individual leading to extremely convincing battles". As much as I love this game, this sounds like an advert and is unprovable (many players would also beg to differ). The Distribution section also sounds like it's not from a NPOV Qoute:" it is still well below the average price of games on the market and many users feel is well above the average quality of games on the market, despite the low cost." This article isn't here to tell use ho cheap and awesome this game is. 70.23.40.97 01:28, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Even though the game is cheap and awesome. ^_~ 200.163.72.28 19:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Modification Section
Do we really need to mention specific mods?
- Simply yes, because most of these mods aren't just new addition to game but total conversions like, 1066 set in England during Norman invasion, Middle Earth mod set during War of the Ring or Onin no ran in medieval Japan. There is very little left out of original game and most of these mods contain more then original game which is still in beta. In my opinion some of these mods deserve separate pages. ;-)) --Ivan Bajlo 09:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
