Talk:Star Fox (series)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
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. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Mid | This article is on a subject of mid priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0. | |
 |
This article has an archived CVG peer review that may contain ideas for improvement. | |
|
CVG To-do:
|
||
 |
Star Fox (series) is part of the Star Fox Games series, a former featured topic candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. Once the objections have been addressed you may resubmit the topic for featured topic status. |
Contents |
[edit] "Money-making"
I removed the (slightly) non-neutral "money-making" from the following opening sentence:
- "The Star Fox series (Japanese: スターフォックス) is one of Nintendo's many famous money-making franchises."
I'm sure most people know that Nintendo, along with mostly any other company out there, wants to make money. --Spug 22:07, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
[edit] question...
In the characters articles, such as Fox McCloud, Falco Lombardi, etc., I was thinking of removing the "Star Fox Assault Vs. Mode Skills" sections. Seeing how in the Wikipedia: What Wikipedia is not article, "FAQ" is listed. Comments? Thunderbrand 17:32, May 11, 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, I would say its not needed, but if the appropriate context was there it would be o.k. information. If its just going to stay a list though, then its not really appropriate, IMHO. Related - isn't there more background information on these characters that can be added to the articles? Seems rather bare. K1Bond007 16:36, May 12, 2005 (UTC)
- Well, there isn't a whole lot of information on them, and what is there is summed up okay. The Krystal article has a good deal of info., though. Thunderbrand 16:46, May 12, 2005 (UTC)
- I'm just surprised, given their Nintendo characters. K1Bond007 17:09, May 12, 2005 (UTC)
- Well, there isn't a whole lot of information on them, and what is there is summed up okay. The Krystal article has a good deal of info., though. Thunderbrand 16:46, May 12, 2005 (UTC)
If no one else objects or does not comment, i'll remove them. Thunderbrand 02:27, May 13, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Merging minor characters?
I was thinking of merging some of the "minor" characters, such as Miyu, Fay Spaniel, Fara Phoenix, Vixy Reinard, Bill Grey, Katt Monroe, ROB 64 (he basically is a minor character now), Caiman, into their own page called List of minor characters in the Star Fox series, like what was done with the planets a while back. Most of these probably won't be significantly expanded anytime soon (especially Miyu and Fay, who I doubt will never be seen outside of Star Fox 2). Comments? Thunderbrand 16:29, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
- If there's no formatting problems with it (placement of pictures, etc.), I think it's a good idea, and I'll gladly help out with it if the need arises. One thing, though; I would keep ROB 64 as its own article, as he technically is part of the team. Jaxl | talk 00:05, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
- Okay, I'll keep ROB 64 on his own page. Thunderbrand 03:51, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Assault timeline
I noticed on the back of the Star Fox: Assault box that it says It's been several years since disaster was adverted on Dinosaur Planet..., while inside the instruction manual it says One year has passed..., so I am confused is to what they are really referring to! Although I'm thinking that the reference inside the manual is the correct one since it uses the name "Sauria" and the back of the box has "Dinosaur Planet", of which Sauria is only used in-game. Comments? Thunderbrand 00:51, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
- I haven't seen the instruction manual since I only rented the game and beat it (hence, it came in a Blockbuster box). I do have a theory, though. I believe the instruction manual probably has the correct story. I think the reason why the manual story differs from the back of the box is because the game was developed by Namco but published by Nintendo. On Nintendo.com's entry on the game, it says something similar to what you said was on the back of the box. However, if Namco was the one developing the game (ie. creating the story), they must have also created the manual, and therefore the official story (the one Namco, the creators of the actual game and storyline produced), is in the manual. Nintendo probably made the box since they were publishing it, but seemed to neglect looking at the story as the creators (Namco) made it and instead put their own version. I know that's probably a bit confusing, but the bottom line here is that Namco made the game and the manual, and therefore their story is probably the official one, while Nintendo probably speculated on what the story was. The fact that the box mentioned Dinosaur Planet and not Sauria makes it even more convincing that Nintendo in fact did not review Namco's original story. Jaxl | talk 02:05, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
- I would tend to agree that in general, game has precedence over manual, which has precedence over box. This being since the back of the box is produced primarily for advertising, and is independent from the game development, while the manual is actually meant as a companion to the game. Aerion//talk 04:04, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
- Okay, that clears it up a bit. Thanks. Thunderbrand 04:17, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Measurement Systems used in the Star Fox universe
Based on our Measurement Systems but adding "Space" in the beginning.
- SM - Space Meters
- SPW - Space Pounds of Thrust
- ST - Space Tons
- SK - Space Kilos
- SKM/H - Space Kilometers/Hour
- SKT/H - Space Knots/Hour
--Arima 04:07, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
- In what games are these used; or more importantly, where are they referrenced from? Thunderbrand 05:40, September 13, 2005 (UTC)
Star Fox and Star Fox 64. --Arima 01:44, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
- Although they have fallen out of use since then, so I would hold off on adding them to articles. I doubt the average person would know, or care, what they mean and translate to. Thunderbrand 04:10, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
- I think they were just used in the strategy guides and/or manuals, but not in the games. Thunderbrand 23:42, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Nova bomb
Recently, A Link to the Past redirect the Nova bomb article to the Arwing article. I was thinking of reverting his changes. The nova bomb article has a lot of info in it and it has info about the Wolfen's and Landmaster's bomb use, not just the Arwing. Thoughts? Thunderbrand 15:31, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
- Nevermind, I merged it. Thunderbrand 21:44, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] External links
Per WP:EL, we should generally avoid too many fansite links. One or two is OK, though. Thunderbrand 16:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
- Indeed, though trouble arose on forums over which external links should be used, leading to fights over whether Arwing Landing was greater than Starfox Database, and vica versa, so I changed it from having one or the other to both. --Blinkstale 18:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Star Fox (Wii)
Really, it has merely been hinted at. There are no confirmations of development whatsoever. A minor note saying that Miyamoto has expressed interest in a Wii title would be fine, but to put it under the official list of games in the series is a bit ridiculous. 199.126.137.209 05:45, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- It's not "ridiculous". It came straight from him. Thunderbrand 14:18, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with "199.126.137.209", Miyamoto only suggested that the Wii-mote would be good for the next Star Fox game, he neither confirmed nor denied actual development of such a game; it's SPOnG who made the assessment that a Wii version is likely, which is an editorial comment, not proof. I think it should be mentioned, but doesn't deserve it's own entry in the list; perhaps a category for future games (confirmed and hinted) should be added. -- VederJuda 15:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, that is true. It has not been officially announced. I guess I'll make a small section about it. Thunderbrand 17:38, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- I think "rumoured" is a bit misleading as well. Who says it's a "rumour"? It just sounds like a possibility. I'm not sure Wikipedia is really even supposed to deal with rumours like this, considering that as far as I know, no websites have actually reported it as a rumour (and even if they have, it still might not be noteworthy). Maybe a headline of something like "series' future" would be more apt. 199.126.137.209 00:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
