Talk:Carcassonne (video game)

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.
VG To-do:
WikiProject Xbox This article is within the scope of WikiProject Xbox, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's articles on Xbox related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the project's importance scale.


Contents

[edit] "designer board game"

Yes, that sounds better than Euroboard game. Good edit. JAF1970 17:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TrueSkill

Someone removed the citation tag I addeed next to the TrueSkill comment. I added the tag not because I'm saying it doesn't use TrueSkill, but because the article says "play is restricted to 2 players, because the game does not support the TrueSkill ranking system". There could be lots of reasons why ranked play is 2 player only, so unless we've got a citation putting it down to the lack of TrueSkill is just original research. A more Wikipedia friendly entry would probably just mention the 2-player ranked games and the lack of TrueSkill without suggesting a link between the two. 195.152.206.139 16:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I absolutely agree. The fact that the game only supports two player ranked play can be readily established, but the reason for this is not necessarily obvious. TrueSkill can work with any number of players, as long as one can calculate a relative ranking at the end of the game. In fact, I'd be quite surprised if the game didn't support TrueSkill, since I had thought that Microsoft was more or less mandating this. --Slordak 17:06, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Forums

Forums are not a valid source of information. That is original research - and baseless research to boot. Find an actual news article about it. Saying "there's a bug because a few people complained about it on the forums" isn't valid - especially when the Sierra support mentions notihng about it. JAF1970 14:45, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Photographic Evidence Of Error?

Would a photograph of a television set showing the River II error actually occuring, i.e., showing the "Expansion Load Failed" screen, count as a source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.112.138 (talk) 21:32, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

The issue is that what you're describing has not been experienced by a significant number of people. If I were you, I'd completely uninstall the game and redownload it for free (which you can dosince you already paid for it... right?) JAF1970 21:44, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

That's the first thing I tried when the issue occured. Uninstalling the entire game and the expansion pack, then reinstalling does not solve the issue. Emptying the console's cache does not help either. Everyone who experiences this problem has either replaced a red-ringed console or upgraded their console to an Elite. This has led to the belief that the expansion matches a specific console ID to the Live account it is downloaded on. It is a genuine problem that is currently unsolveable due to the fact that Sierra Online won't even provide support for their own product. Perhaps if more 360's start to red-ring and are replaced, the issue will become more prominent, prompting Sierra to finally fix the issue.

I'm not saying Carcassonne is a bad game and I'm not saying anything libelous about Sierra Online. The fact is that there is a problem with the River II expansion and I feel it deserves a place on the Wiki, at least to let consumers know that they may experience a problem if they must replace their console. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.112.138 (talk) 01:27, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Board game

This game is a seperate entity to the board game, and there are certain minor modifications. Do not delete gameplay/scoring. JAF1970 (talk) 20:28, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

The Xbox Live Arcade version plus countries other than America use the 3rd Edition (read: International) rules. The US board game release of Carcasonne uses the 1st Edition rules if you care to read the Carcassonne wiki. Thus, if you would have read board game wiki, you would have seen this. The scoring isn't different, it just uses the latest edition. Now, since I'm not American, I wouldn't know of any other America-specific changes. If there are other differences, please point them out, and maybe we'll see that it's just another issue of 1st Edition rules. But if it's just as I say, and no other differences, I'm asking that you undo your revert. If you don't name any other differences which aren't a by-product of using different Editions, I'll revert the page later. Ong elvin (talk) 23:30, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and if you do undo your revert, you should add something similar to this line in as well to prevent further problems.

(The American release of the board game uses the first edition rules.)

OR

(The XBLA version uses the 3rd Edition rules.)

Ong elvin (talk) 23:32, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Actually, now I'm thinking that regardless of whether or not there's any differences in America, the Gameplay section should point to the Board Game page, simply because that explains the 3rd Edition rules which the XBLA version uses. Ong elvin (talk) 23:42, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Right then, that's been 24 hours, and I know you've been active in that time JAF. You've pointed out no other America-specific changes, and even if you did I'd say that such differences should be on the Board Game page, rather than the XBLA version page. I'll be reverting your change then. Ong elvin (talk) 22:18, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Putting a stub tag on the article. The artcle explained the rules better than the BOARD GAME article did. Good job. JAF1970 (talk) 22:38, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Then by all means you can add that information to the board game article, which makes for a better place. It doesn't need a STUB designation, the gameplay is already defined in the linked article. In fact, the gameplay in the Board Game article goes into more detail than it should. Like it or not, someone would have eventually come in and cropped it down to pretty much the size I've cropped it down to, because scoring information goes beyond what Wikipedia intends to cover. Furthermore, the Board Game is actually the more detailed page, providing the same details plus a scoring table. Ong elvin (talk) 23:24, 19 November 2007 (UTC)