Talk:Chrono Trigger

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Chrono Trigger article.
Article policies
Archives: 1, 2
Featured article star Chrono Trigger is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Featured topic star Chrono Trigger is part of the "Chrono" series (project page), a featured topic identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 10, 2008.
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Peer review This Everydaylife article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale (comments).
Maintained The following user(s) are actively involved with this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources:
ZeaLitY (talk)
This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.
Archive
Archives
Begining (January 2005) — April 2006 April 2006 — January 2007

Contents

[edit] References in popular culture

Chrono Trigger is stated to be Hiro Nakamura's favorite game on his (fictional) official blog in this entry and this one too. Nakamura is one of the main character of the American drama series Heroes. Could we mention this somewhere in this article? Kariteh 21:53, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Why? Is it really notable enough that it's the favourite game of a fictional character? I don't think it is. Nique talk 00:30, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
But why didn't anybody delete this section in the Featured Article FFVI then? Kariteh 10:17, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Probably because there's more than one entry, and the two entries are both about things that Square did, although admittedly the name of the section is a little misleading. That section doesn't really belong there, either: it's too much like a trivia section. Nique talk 12:44, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spoiler warning?

Hi folks, I added the spoiler warning to the Characters / Plot section; I then looked at the history and realized that most think the entire article is a spoiler. If this is consensus go ahead and revert (and I apologize) but looking at the article, it's pretty much those two sections that actually give away what happens in the course of the game. Thoughts? Spoom - Talk 04:55, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

If you have a look at Talk:Final Fantasy VII#Spoiler Warning, as well as Talk:Final Fantasy X#Spoilers Tags?, hopefully you'll understand why I removed the spoiler tags you just added, as well as why I oppose the use of spoiler tags. If you need my reasoning, again, just look at those two discussions. It can really be summed up by the following phrase: Wikipedia's job is to present information to the reader, not protect the reader from information. If someone sees a Plot or Story section, they should realize that there are going to be spoilers, and if they don't like that, they have the option to look elsewhere. This is an encyclopedia, after all, not an overprotective mother. Nique talk 12:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
That's fine if you don't like the tags, but please don't go around removing them from articles just because you deem them unnecessary. They are a part of Wikipedia, like them or not. Until there is an official ruling on them falling out of use, then I don't see the problem with keeping them intact. 68.209.235.149 (talk) 04:32, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Disard that. I actually understand how avoiding spoiler tags would fall under the no-censorship policy. Although, I'm wondering why they even exist to begin with. 68.209.235.149 (talk) 22:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Multiple endings were not revolutionary

I'm not gonna get into a revision battle with you guys, so this is the last time I'm gonna change the entry, but I've proven and given references for the fact that multiple endings was not a revolutionary feature in chrono trigger. If you want to make sure to keep incorrect information in wikipedia, there's really very little stopping you. If you wanted to make it factually correct and still keep a mention of the multiple endings you could even keep it in there if you change the adjective from "revolutionary" to something like "outstanding" or "notable." But as it stands now, the statement that multiple endings in chrono trigger was revolutionary is verifiably false. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.167.66.10 (talk) 03:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

I re-reverted the above. As mentioned in the earlier edit summary, multiple endings was notable for an RPG, especially the way that the multiple endings were implemented and combined with the save plus. The article never claimed it was the first or only game with multiple endings, it claims that CT had features that were seen as revolutionary, which seems true. Actually, has there been another game that has multiple endings the way that CT had them? I haven't seen any, and I have played a lot of RPGs by now. ;^) If anyone disagrees, then discuss it before you start a revert war. This is especially true if you are new to Wikipedia and haven't established an edit history where people can gain confidence in your opinion. wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 14:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

If you want to keep the phrase that multiple endings were revolutionary, you have to rebut the proof I've offered. If you simply keep the phrase in without justifying it on the discussion page or offering references, then you're doing an injustice to maintaining truth in wikipedia. If you want to keep the phrase in there then you need to offer references to the fact that it was a revolutionary feature. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.101.135.235 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 21 March 2007.

It's also worth noting that previous "multiple ending" games, such as Metroid as the IP user referenced, contained a few barely distinct endings, whereas Chrono Trigger contains, I believe, 12 distinct endings. Dlong 15:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I would suggest that the anon should get more familiar with Wikipedia and how it works. It is not up to the group to prove something to the individual; it is up to the individual to prove something to the group. It is clear that you are new to Wikipedia and don't know how things work. I also suspect that you have never played Chrono Trigger, since you seem to be arguing your interpretation of what the article said rather than the actual game itself. You obviously re-reverted the change before you read this discussion, but I had left a note on your first IP talk page suggesting that you discuss the issue before reverting.
It is clear that you have several IPs available to you, but you should not think that makes you immune to disciplinary actions if you decide to turn this into a revert war. If you can convince the majority of the people who are monitoring this article that the multiple endings of CT are not notable, then fine, but until then, please let the article alone. wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 15:46, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
You're wrong, on many counts.

1) Chrono Trigger is one of my favorite games of all time, that's the only reason why I care about what its entry states. 2) I've given references and examples why my position is what it is and so far the only response I've heard is basically "nu uh." 3) If you want to make a statement that someone has clearly disputed and backed up with references and examples, if you want to keep it in there in the face of that contrary proof then the onus is now on YOU to backup why the case is not as the proof I've offered says it is. 4) I'm not new to wikipedia, I just don't care about building up some online persona here. 5) I'm not switching IPs to be sneaky like you're insinuating, you're clearly unaware of dynamic IP addresses. 6) I never said the multiple endings were not notable, in fact I specifically said if you wanted to use the adjective "notable" or "outstanding" or something similar then it would be a true statement, but using the adjective revolutionary in the phrase "... aspects of Chrono Trigger were seen as revolutionary — including its multiple endings..." is simply not true as already given references and examples to the contrary. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.101.135.235 (talk) 16:27, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

As has been noted previously, the STYLE of the multiple endings was revolutionary (prior to CT, as has been pointed out, the most endings were about 3 or so, and they were rather similar, whereas CT had very different lines/paths to the endings, and twelve very different endings to boot), and to use the full quote rather than take anything out of context: "At the time of its release, certain aspects of Chrono Trigger were seen as revolutionary — including its multiple endings, plot-related sidequests focused on character development, unique battle system, and detailed graphics."
If you're SO pedantic about the issue, would you be satisfied if we changed it to "the number of distinct multiple endings available" instead? It bloats the phrase up something fierce, but if you're going to go this far over two words (which, by the way, we have provided refutation for, if you'd care to read the rest of the discussion and the other replies a little more carefully) it may be better to bloat it up, rather than omit something which is true and interesting. Nique talk 17:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I'd be satisfied. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.101.135.235 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 21 March 2007.
I think I came up with a decent compromise. I left the original text, but added details in a footnote to explain why the multiple endings were notable. wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 20:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Acceptable. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.101.135.235 (talk • contribs) 20:31, 21 March 2007.

Chrono Trigger was not necessarily the first game to use multiple endings, but it was one of the pioneers of it. That makes it a very influential title. LOZ: OOT 22:24, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and just so you know, people who haven't played Chrono Trigger don't know what they're missing. LOZ: OOT 22:27, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sentenced to death?

The article states: "There, Crono is placed on trial for allegedly kidnapping Marle. Through the manipulations of the king's chancellor, Crono is sentenced to death, but later breaks free from his prison.", wich in certain cases is correct, but one can get to the trial and by means of his actions (checking the princess first, not stealing anything, helping the kid get his pet back, etc.) one can be incarcerated by a minor charge, not sentenced to death. Shloud this be noted? Vicco Lizcano 17:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC) (Tell me where I'm wrong)

While you can avoid being sentenced to death at the trial, when they take Chrono over to the jail, the jailer is told he was sentenced to death. wrp103 (Bill Pringle) (Talk) 17:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I can also confirm that after taking him to jail the Chancellor says it must be a paperwork mishap and that the jailor shouldn't question him (after saying he has a few (3?) days to live). --Notmyhandle 23:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Cool, It's been a long since I last played this game, but I guess I remembered wrong... it happens to me a lot :-S

Vicco Lizcano 17:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC) (Hey! Listen!)

[edit] Lavos's location within the Earth.

First of all, no textual evidence if given in the game as to where exactly Lavos ends up. We do however have the landing of Lavos which was strong enough to leave a massive crater. The only other thing that appears in game is Lavos emerging on The Day of Lavos; the ground cracks and he slowly rises. We can make the assumption that he is close to the surface (i.e. under the Earth's mantle), but we should remain ambiguous since there is no definitive answer. --Notmyhandle 03:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Notwithstanding his name (Lavos), the earth's mantle (and the various cracks where the mantle can penetrate to the surface of the earth) is the only area on earth wherein lava is present. Lavos's appearances are always accompanied by the presence of bright orange magma and the violent release of incidendiary material. Ex-Nintendo Employee 04:20, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
And how do you know he wasn't further down, in the planet's core? Kariteh 13:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Because in 10,000BC Zeal was able to dig down to Lavos with the Mammon Machine, something that could not have been accomplished were he in the core. Ex-Nintendo Employee 16:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
It was in 12,000 BC, and Zeal didn't dig anything. The Mammon Machine is a device which absorbs the emanations of Lavos' energy, it's not a digging machine! Zeal only built a palace in the ocean to bring the Mammon Machine closer to Lavos (who was further down). Besides, the Japanese version's name for the Ocean Palace is "Ocean Floor Temple Vimanam". Kariteh 21:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Wrong on several accounts (with the exception of the largely irrelevant era number. Zeal DID dig down to Lavos and took the mammon machine with them- the palace wasn't just some building, it was a huge underground complex dug into the ocean floor THROUGH the crust, which is why it has its particular shape, and why it's in the ocean in the first place (the ocean floor is the closest place to the earth's mantle). But if you're so absolutely stuck on arguing about it, there are far more important things to do than argue game plot mechanics with YOU. I'm taking a Wikibreak for a while- you've ruined my Wikipedia experience for the time being, so whatever. Ex-Nintendo Employee 03:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
My site enjoys analyzing the plot, and in the absence of specific notation of Lavos's position within the earth, and considering that Lavos might exist in a pocket dimension and that the Ocean Floor is depicted as being beneath the waves in a cut scene played during the party's entry to the structure, I agree that the article is fine right now in terms of safe harmony with canon. Well, this sounds pretty puffed up, but thought I should chime in...eh, peanut gallery, anyone? Zeality 04:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm glad you brought some of those points up Zeality. Again, Ex-Nintendo, what are you basing your opinions on? We have the ocean palace, clearly viewable in the ocean. We have the Mammon Machine that gets moved to the ocean palace to be closer to Lavos, thereby making it easier to harvest more of his power. We have Lavos who crashed to Earth, where he gets buried. Then there's The Day of Lavos where he emerges. Are you basing the mantle thing on the tiny little cracks depicted during The Day of Lavos? Mantle (geology) might help to understand the layers of the Earth. Perhaps you meant the Earth's crust? If you were basing it on that, then it could be a possibility, having only to dig a small distance. Zeality can you define "pocket dimension?" --Notmyhandle 06:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
It's just fanon to explain Lavos's behavior and environment. Here's the definition. Zeality 14:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Me likes. But still, most of that is based on defects within the game and thus ambiguity in the article is of course the safest and most reliable information. I mean unless the creator's of Chrono Trigger write a letter stating exactly what we're questioning, I doubt we will ever change to something specific. --Notmyhandle 23:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree that there is no reason to believe that Lavos was in the mantle - the game just says Lavos is deep beneath the surface. I find it interesting, however, that the article has mentioned mantle for quite some time. This wasn't a recent edit that introduced the concept. wrp103 (Bill Pringle) (Talk) 03:07, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
This is because people tend to overlook things once an article has passed FA, as if FA meant everything is automatically perfect. Kariteh 08:19, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gameplay

However, Chrono Trigger's gameplay deviates from traditional RPGs in that, rather than random encounters, many enemies are openly visible on field maps or lie in wait to ambush the party. Contact with enemies on a field map initiates a battle that occurs directly on the field map itself rather than on a separate battle screen.[5] This concept had previously been featured in such titles as Secret of Mana and Final Fantasy Adventure, but was uncommon at the time for RPGs outside the action RPG genre.

Perhaps I misunderstand, but isn't this similar to Ultima 6, 7 & 8? Nil Einne 17:29, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Well i am on the understanding that Lavos existed within is own sort of temporal distortion,for example that cool looking,almost water looking background you have is apprent regardless of where you fight him,in that sense i don't think he exists in just one place.

^regardless of my own opinion i do think it's concievable to think Lavos burrowed down to or near the core and yet isn't limited into being in one location as he either teleports himself or teleports everyone in 12000 bc (by everyone i mean the party Scala,Janus etc as well) in which Crono as we know dies.

But again it's just guess work.

End of the day it's everyones best guess to a fictional story with questions left un-answered.In terms of wikipedia we need to stick to what we know for sure as well as what can be summised beyond-resonable doubt perhaps through explaination in Chrono Cross and other related things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.225.11 (talk) 09:42, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chrono Compendium

Chrono compendium should remain on the page and not be removed. It IS a wiki running mediawiki, it's just locked down because its finished; also, if you believe that, then I expect you to remove Memory Alpha from every single Star Trek article on Wikipedia or be a hypocrite.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fiend Kraken III (talk • contribs) 19:06, 9 July 2007.

Hypocrite? Yeah, right. Like I even read any of those Star Trek article in the first place. What you seem to forget is that Wikipedia is run by millions of different voluntary people, who are not paid. It's not a small personal page with one webmaster controlling everything. Consequently, one man on Wikipedia can't do everything. I'm willing to watch this Chrono Trigger article in my free time because I like it, but I don't watch or edit the Star Trek ones since I don't like Star Trek and I don't have any motivation to do so. If you want to remove Memory Alpha from every Star Trek article, feel free. Whether you do it or not, it will not affect the treatment of this article. The nature of Wikipedia means that you can't make a convincing argument based on what other articles do or don't exist; because there's nothing stopping anyone from creating any article. Plenty of articles exist that probably shouldn't. Also, since articles must wait for someone who is interested in the subject to notice they're missing before they're created, a lot of articles don't exist that probably should.
So just pointing out that an article on a similar subject exists doesn't prove that the article in question should also exist; it's quite possible that the other article should also be deleted but nobody has noticed it and put it forward for AfD yet. Sometimes arguments are made that other articles have been put forward for AfD and survived/deleted (the most famous example being the Pokémon test), but even here caution should be used. Deletion debates can sometimes be faulty, and even if the debate was correct it can be hard to draw comparisons: does the fact that there is an article on every Pokémon character mean there necessarily should be an article on every character in Super Mario Bros? Or every character in World of Warcraft? Or every character in Adventure Quest? Comparisons can be highly subjective, and so it's better to look at the debates in question and see what policies were cited and make an argument based on how they apply to the current debate than just say "x was kept so this should be too". The generic form of this argument, that "loads of other crap articles exist" is also common. Kariteh 20:51, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


Regardless of your personal editing happens, surely the Wiki must be consistent in it's own rules.

  • External links should be used for "information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail". No one's arguing that the site is referenced, but it contains a lot more detail on the game which constitutes further research for those interested in the topic.
  • Mobygames has next to no relevant information on the topic. I mean, come on. Anyone can slap together an amalgated review score and an image of the title screen.
  • All the Chrono articles were passed to featured or good with the Compendium in the external links.
  • The copyright corollary is bogus here because Gamefaqs, Mobygames, and all those Musicbrainz articles use images just as the Compendium does without copyright license.
  • Yes, there are featured subjects on more than just Star Trek with external links to Wikis. Let's look at FF6's page. Oops! A big fat link in the external links section to the Final Fantasy Wiki at Wikia, a for profit Wiki site. Give me a break. Some renegade editor is not going to stranglehold information from being placed on the Chrono Trigger article when it's perfectly finely proliferated on other topics under the EL guidelines. I guess Bill Pringle was lucky you didn't see his endings link, but now it's gone too since your ideology has been called into question. Fiend Kraken III 17:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree with most of what you said. You're right, please remove those GameFAQs, Mobygames and Musicbrainz links. They don't really add much information to the article. As for the FF Wikia, please discuss this on the FF WikiProject talk page if you really care about this unrelated topic. Kariteh 09:18, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Or how about I add the Compendium back on the Chrono Trigger page? That's much easier and in everyone's best interests, no? Why the hell are you so against the Compendium remaining on this page as a source of information for anyone who reads through the page? The Compendium was not removed from the page until a few weeks back, and I assume that it was you who removed it. It seems to me that before you started your editing of this article other users were perfectly happy with the Chrono Compendium being listed in the external links section. Fiend Kraken III 11:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

The Compendium is already mentioned when necessary in footnotes, and that's several times throughout the article. As for who removed the external link, as far as I remember it wasn't me (not that it's relevant anyway). There are things called policies and guidelines on Wikipedia, and me loving or disliking the Chrono Compendium has nothing to do with it. As for your argument which basically says that "it's fine since it has been there for a very long time", it's not relevant either. Just look at Final Fantasy music, it's been like that for a very long time, and yet it's not what one would call a particularly great article. Kariteh 19:18, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Apparently you didn't read his message, because Wikipedia's policy SUPPORTS adding the Compendium to external links, not removing it. A resource that covers the topic in greater detail than the article can allow is not linkspam; it is a justified external link --207.224.61.126 21:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC) Anonymous

[edit] List of Chrono Trigger Endings

The link to my list of Chrono Trigger Endings was recently deleted. The link has been there for a long time, and the edit summary note said: "1 already in the references section", but I'm not sure what that means. There is a note in the references section that I created which explains why the multiple endings were notable. This was the result of an earlier discussion. I couldn't find any link to a list of endings.

I don't feel good about adding the link back in, since it points to my list on my web site. This link was discussed once before, and the consensus at the time was that the link was fine. A reader can get to my list through gamefaqs, but personally I think the HTML form in that link is much better than the plain text file gamefaqs require.

Any thoughts? -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) (Talk) 21:52, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

My edit summary was meant to say "Removed one link from the External Links section since it is already present in the References section". Basically, the link is there, in ref number 8. There is no need to show it twice. Kariteh 21:58, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Ahhh! I missed that. My apologies, and thanks for clearing that up. Of course, the fact that I had trouble finding it might indicate that leaving it in the External links section might be appropriate. But, as I said before, somebody else will have to do that, since if I did it, it would be a vanity link. ;^) -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) (Talk) 03:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Well it's easier to find when reading the article, since it's cited at the top when the article is speaking about these endings. Kariteh 08:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References have an extra period

Cite video game adds a period to the developer (or publisher), which means we end up with things like "Inc.." and "Co.." in the references. We need to clean this up right? Is there a way we can alter Cite video game to check for Inc/Co on a case by case basis and the period so we don't have to worry about it? --68.44.186.152 00:49, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About the IGN list

In the article, it is stated that It came in second place behind The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time on the 2005 edition of IGN's 100 greatest video games of all time referring to this list. But on this list, Chrono Trigger ranks 13th. Am I misinterpreting the text? --pred 22:27, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

In fact, it came in second on the 2006 edition. I changed the text to reflect this. --pred 22:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Obvious stuff

Took out some a little too obvious and unecessary text like "if a monster hit you, you will loose HP, then you need to drink a potion or spell to restore HP" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.8.241.106 (talk) 08:24, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

But that's not necessarily going to be obvious for those who have never played this style of RPG. Rember that we have to cater to the general reader. — TKD::Talk 08:28, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] spoiler warning

we need teh spoiler wangring. the plot summary reduced the value of my gameplay —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.229.89.150 (talk) 20:48, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

No wangrings here. :| (Steampowered 09:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC)).
Please see the above discussion on this very talk page. ~ Hibana 14:51, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Relation to Dragon Ball?

I noticed that a lot of the character art looks very similar to characters in Dragon Ball. Is there any relation between these two? Lightblade 17:11, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Akira Toriyama, the artist of Dragon Ball, was the artist for this game. Dlong 19:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Official Page

Well, the official page seems to have been taken down, so should the link be removed? 86.8.247.83 (talk) 19:43, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

The change has been reflected, thanks for the heads up. It seems they took down every page devoted to older systems, including the Game Boy Advance. Probably some cleanup it's needed in other pages of the Wikipedia. --Lashiec (talk) 21:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Character list

The character list does not have real world information in order to assert notability, and the characters have a good amount of coverage, so there is currently no need for a list. It will be redirected here soon. TTN (talk) 00:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Oppose merge, and I don't think lists (to assert notability?) have to provide real-world information. Tim Q. Wells (talk) 02:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose - Don't do it. --n1yaNt 18:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I too oppose the merge. The article absolutely passes the criteria of having received significant coverage in reliable sources that were independent of the subject, as per WP:N. If the whole of the information contained in what TTN will, given his record (and his assurance that his opinion on the matter is unquestionable), delete with or without consensus, is merged the way he typically merges things, all that will happen is that information will be lost. What he is suggesting is whole destructively, and contrary to the nature of any useful text. Essentially every rule listed under Wikipedia's "Arguments against deleting articles for non-notability" directly refutes the need for merging not only this article, but for a great deal many others that TTN has effectively deleted. Bottom line, he seems to have forgotten that, as listed under those very arguments, obscure content isn't harmful. 65.184.129.246 (talk) 04:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I expect equal treatment with all those Characters of Final Fantasy articles which have the same number of references. Zeality (talk) 05:55, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose redirect. If you're going to turn the list of characters into a redirect, don't even pretend to have a merge discussion. The list of characters looks too long for this article and spinning it out into its own article conforms to the guideline on summary style. This article became a featured article while the list was on a separate page. The list of characters cites GamePro and it also cites Chrono Compendium, a source this featured article also cites. What other "real word information" are you looking for? --Pixelface (talk) 10:55, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I oppose the redirect/merge as well. The character page is already extensive and has a bevy of references to back them up, even if one site has much of the answers. Besides, redirecting them would undo several man-hours and untold numbers of edits that people put it in here...as TTN is fond of doing on TV shows with long episode lists, because he is - fortunately for him, WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA holds me back from saying more that might be really offensive. Leave the character page as is, OK? Thank you. Eaglestorm (talk) 11:20, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

For a character list to be separated without real world information to establish notability, it needs to provide coverage that the article cannot. The character list, while informative, is unnecssary. It belongs on a video game wiki rather than this site. You either need to provide real world information or show how we lose quality by not having a list that is already covered within two sections of this article/ TTN (talk) 15:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

What sort of real world information are you looking for? Background information on the designers of the characters? Background information on the print artists? Background information on the voiceover artists? How long it took to develop the characters? Much of that information is already in this article. Some characters don't only appear in Chrono Trigger but also Chrono Cross, Radical Dreamers, and Xenogears. The list of characters would be too long to include in this article and having it in a separate list is consistent with summary style. All the things that make this game notable also make the characters notable. --Pixelface (talk) 17:18, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Two examples are Characters of Final Fantasy VIII and Characters of Kingdom Hearts. The amount of information needs to be enough to warrant separation just in case it is possible to find a few bits here and there. Things like cameos are irrelevant, as they can be covered within the other games or the series page (that is the kind of place for that stuff anyways). All of the important characters on that list are already covered here, and if the plot is cut down, I'm sure any other important details can take over some of the unnecessary plot details. You have to remember that each section carries a certain weight; the current balance does not require a split. TTN (talk) 18:28, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Have you even looked at the references in the Characters of Final Fantasy VIII article? The majority of them cite the game. Many others cite the character profiles on square-enix.com. Many others cite reviews for the game. I see about 3 references that mention the developers. The Characters of Chrono Trigger article is too long to be merged into this article, so I think a separate article is fine. --Pixelface (talk) 11:13, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose - The character article provides useful information that the article does not. This article is already too long (60KB!), and adding more data on characters won't help anything. In articles that are too long, it is perfectly acceptable to split off sections of it into separate articles if there is enough info (which there is for the characters - that article is 35KB, even if it were cut down to just main characters it would still have enough data to justify keeping it). --Eruhildo (talk) 19:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm just going to chime in and say that aside from common sense, 32KB is not Word of God limit. The Byzantine Empire is around 100 KB, as are some other featured articles. But those damn warning messages really promote needless pruning of notable information. Zeality (talk) 03:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I suggest that people search for real world information if they would like to keep the list. I'll certainly go away if enough real information is found (i.e. if someone goes and digs up every trivial quote from every trivial review, that won't do much for it). TTN (talk) 18:41, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I do not think the list needs real-world information. Tim Q. Wells (talk) 19:35, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Where did you get that idea? There are two reasons for a list to exist per WP:FICT (though one is really only being discussed). The first is due to real world information, and the second, disputed one is for expanded coverage of the topic. The second only applies if the characters cannot be covered within the main article, and that is not the case here. TTN (talk) 19:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
It lists the characters (then gives some information about it). Why would we redirect the list when the "side" information doesn't provide real-world information? Also, I don't think most readers of the list really care about the real-world information. Tim Q. Wells (talk) 19:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Please reference WP:FICT instead of your own opinions. While you see this as helpful, it provides nothing more than an expanded view on something that does not require it because the necessary details are already covered. The readers are rather irrelevant when we're talking about fan/unnecessary information. TTN (talk) 20:05, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
The game Chrono Trigger is verification that the characters exist and are notable. Undue weight refers primarily to differing viewpoints. The statement in WP:WEIGHT, "An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject." does not mean that articles cannot be split off. WP:WEIGHT also says "Minority views can receive attention on pages specifically devoted to them." It is not "undue weight" to split larger articles into several separate articles. And I really don't care about WP:FICT says — the whole thing is disputed. I think you need to realize that the people who are most willing to put time into improving an article (and do it for free) are fans. I don't care about your opinion of what is "necessary." --Pixelface (talk) 10:06, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
WP:FICT says: "The following sections use the term "article" to encompass articles, sub-articles, and lists." See what I said above as an argument against following that guideline in this situation. Tim Q. Wells (talk) 20:14, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
You don't just get to ignore guidelines because they interfere with your views. There is currently a large discussion going on involving reformatting the guideline (not in a way that is going to loosen it up), so feel free to try to change it if you wish. TTN (talk) 20:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
If WP:FICT is not a policy, any editor can ignore it as much as they want. Feel free to try to make WP:FICT a policy if you wish. --Pixelface (talk) 10:09, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I am not ignoring the guideline. I'm suggesting we ignore it, and giving my reasons for it. Let's get that straight. Tim Q. Wells (talk) 20:19, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Fine, guidelines in general are not to be ignored because they interfere with a small group's views. TTN (talk) 20:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Small groups? What about everyone above? Tim Q. Wells (talk) 20:22, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
This is the small group that I'm talking about. TTN (talk) 20:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I wonder where everyone else is. Tim Q. Wells (talk) 20:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

This is getting stupid. TTN please take this to a user talk page (not mine) if you want to argue with other editors. Both WP:SS and WP:FICT support having a sub-article like the characters list. I quote the following from WP:FICT:

Sub-articles are sometimes born for technical reasons of length or style. Even these articles need real-world information to prove their notability, but must rely on the parent article to provide some of this background material (due to said technical reasons). In these situations, the sub-article should be viewed as an extension of the parent article, and judged as if it were still a section of that article. Such sub-articles should clearly identify themselves as fictional elements of the parent work within the lead section, and editors should provide as much real-world content as possible.

You appear to be the only editor here who wants to get rid of the characters list. Please bear in mind that a consensus is not the opinion of one editor. --Eruhildo (talk) 00:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Strong Merge - The article establishes no notability through reliable sources WP:RS, does not comply with WP:FICTION or WP:WAF either. Unless there is an establishment of notability, all the keep votes and the non-policy oriented rationales, "it's too long, it doesn't need real world information, it's useful", then it should be merged regardless. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:15, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Then I will reiterate: go ahead and try to pull it off for all the Characters of Final Fantasy articles first. Zeality (talk) 06:54, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Zeality, we've worked on the same topics for several years now, and you know as well as I do how difficult it has been for some people to understand why they don't need their own articles, and what happened this last summer to the Final Fantasy wikiproject as it tore itself apart over that very issue. A gradual approach is appropriate for that group of articles as it will be either improved or merged. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:56, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
TTN has no intention of merging the list, it's going to be turned into a redirect. Chrono Trigger is notable. Therefore, the characters in Chrono Trigger are notable. The characters and the game are inextricably linked. You cannot have the game without the characters. The game is worthy of notice. The characters are worthy of notice. How can you say the game is worthy of notice, but the characters are not? The real world information in this article pertaining to the characters (information on the designers, the artists, etc) just needs to be added to the character list if a lack of real world information is the problem. --Pixelface (talk) 10:52, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Good point. It must be considered a factor in this discussion that by all accounts, TTN has no intent at all to merge. --Kizor is in a constant state of flux 16:28, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Very, very strongly oppose the merge. There have been plenty of interviews that can be sourced. I've said this once and I've said it again: Merging for Merging's sake alone harms the project. Does the article need improvement? Absolutely. Is that any reason to go ahead and destroy it? Absolutely not. The list of Homestar Runner characters was merged for merging's sake, despite the fact that there are MANY INTERVIEWS WITH THE CREATORS WHERE THEY TALK ABOUT OUT OF UNIVERSE STUFF FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL CHARACTER, and despite the fact that other less notable characters kept their own articles because of the fact that they were on TV and made by Hollywood (and don't give me this WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS BS, because I'm well aware of it. I know it's the same thing here. Kato and company have been interviewed many times. --Sir Crazyswordsman 00:53, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose TTN, your overzealous mergers (always disregarding any opposing voices) have worn away my patience. Work with the community and do some TRUE consensus seeking. CharonX/talk 17:26, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Zeality has some interviews that can be sourced, however, they're in Japanese

I'm going to see if I can do something with him about that. If we can do it, it makes the article suitable for expansion rather than merging. --Sir Crazyswordsman 21:25, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Where can I find said interviews? I know some Japanese so I might be able to go through them. --Eruhildo (talk) 22:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm waiting on scans for the Chrono Trigger player's guide interview. There are two developer interview videos, however - Video 1, Video 2 Zeality (talk) 00:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Ack, videos are no fun on dial-up. Oh well, thanks anyway. ^_^ --Eruhildo (talk) 03:05, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Audio Section edited

There's a bit in the Audio Section of the article (I don't know who added it in) about OverClocked Remix using their music to "provide an orchestrated score to an amateur script for a hypothetical Chrono Trigger film." Since there is no evidence of such a script being made (at least, no final drafts have been reviewed and submitted to a professional agency and the info has been made public for what I know) and the same goes for the soundtrack being re-made by OverClock Remix, either it needs a stable citation link to confirm or have the "hypothetical film" bit removed. Thank you. mikecucuk 09:42, 09 January 2008 (UTC)

P.S. I have that info to see if there is any response to it. If there is, please no flamewars or character assassinations. You're talk is with me. Your beef should not be directed toward anyone else. Thank you again. mikecucuk 09:42, 09 January 2008 (UTC)

  • I agree. There's no precedence or a citation to prove it. Leave it removed. Jaredcornelison 16:36, 09 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaredcornelison (talk • contribs)
The script did exist as an attachment on some post in the Symphonic thread. But since the final result was a little under par, and since it's all hypothetical, non-notable stuff anyway, we can just leave it off. Zeality (talk) 04:38, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Consensus on spoiler tags and spoiler images

Since there's a bit of concern with using spoiler tags in the article, could we possibly try to reach a consensus on their usage within this article? Bear in mind simply being opposed to the usage of spoiler tags in general should not apply to this article -- there's no reason to base the decision on personal conviction alone. This is a consensus as to which parts of the article need to be tagged, if at all.

My only concern is the FMV example near the bottom, showing Crono and Marle being wed. Obviously, this is a major spoiler. It might be better to use an FMV shot that doesn't give away any plot details. I generally don't think spoiler tags are necessary under sections clearly titled "Plot" or "Story," because the spoilers would be implied, but that's best left to other editors. 68.209.235.149 (talk) 04:38, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:Spoiler Dlong (talk) 04:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure who replaced the original FMV image, which depicted Ayla battling some Reptites. Zeality (talk) 06:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 3 edits

Zeality went and reverted my edits he didn't like, so I'm restoring 2 of them and modifying a third since he had a good point.

1. Square themselves called it "the Dream Team" - OK, added. It's Fanboy City to not name who, exactly, called them this thrilling name.

2. There's no need to document the future acquisitions and mergers of a company that publishes a book. Lord of the Rings was published by a company that no longer exists; it's not necessary right at the top of the intro to slow down the reader by painstakingly explaining what company it is now (which doesn't matter anyway, since the company it has become isn't the company that published it back then).

3. You need to cite other sources if you're going to say "Critics" called it revolutionary - go ahead and leave the quote in if you can find a couple others; but Nintendo Power is not a disinterested and reliable source when talking about Nintendo games. It's a house organ of Nintendo that promotes their products. Tempshill (talk) 05:02, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

(now Square Enix) is a nuance of virtually every article published in the period before the merger. Whether to include that from now on is a topic of discussion at WP:VG. ZeaLitY [ DREAM - REFLECT ] 08:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Read This Now

This article is a featured article; that means that it passed a review conducted by fellow Wikipedians who held this article to the highest standards when it was nominated and has been greatly improved as standards have risen. It is an article on Wikipedia because reliable sources have spoken of this game many times, and it is one of the most highly praised games ever made. Articles on video games are allowed to be featured on the Mainpage because the Featured Article Director picks a variety of articles to be featured, and in the last few weeks every kind of article has been demonstrated, and as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of everything notable, it is totally appropriate for it to be on the Mainpage.

Therefore, any attempts to bad mouth the article in an unconstructive way will be ignored, any attempt to recall the Featured Article Director, delete this article, or take it to Featured Article Review without just cause will be quickly undone. Either contribute in a productive way to Wikipedia, or don't complain. Thank you. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

ZOMG STOP TEH VIDEO GAEM PERSECUTION!!1!!one
Seriously, nobody cares. The repeated appearance of these trivial pop-culture articles on the main page is an embarrassment. Arrogant insistence that others "contribute in a productive way," by agreeing with you, doesn't change this. <eleland/talkedits> 00:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
You're an embarrassment. ZeaLitY [ DREAM - REFLECT ] 00:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
What did he just say? If you think there are more important articles then go and improve them yourself. Maybe one day they will be good enough. --Tyrfing (talk) 00:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
YAAAY FEATURED ARTICLE! Chrono Trigger was, in my humble opinion, THE BEST GAME EVER CREATED. I was sorely dissapointed when playing Cross; so much so that I returned it forthwith. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.138.26.138 (talk) 01:40, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
I completely agree with the preceding unsigned statement! Chrono Trigger was my favorite game when I was a kid and is still awesome! Thanks to all the contributors for their hard work! Congratulations you unidentified army of awesome people! :P Hamsterlopithecus (talk) 02:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
The pleasure's mine. ZeaLitY [ DREAM - REFLECT ] 02:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, Zeality's a one-man-army of awesomeness :) JACOPLANE • 2008-04-11 07:47

[edit] No pic on main page?

This featured article doesn't have the boxart on the article. Why not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kashakak (talk • contribs) 03:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Lately, only free use images are allowed to be used on the main page, and since the boxart is copyright, and we don't have any free use chrono images... Judgesurreal777 (talk) 03:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] vandalism

Someone put up some ascii type letters about vandalism. erased it. Gigakight (talk) 22:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Fixed :).¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 22:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

i meant i erased it. Twice in different subjects. sorry for not being clear. Gigakight (talk) 22:21, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WHY NO PAL RELEASE?

Whilst I appreciate that back in 1995 a 32 meg cartridge was a bit much to port onto PAL, especially as role playing games back then just never got released in Europe. But why wasn't it included on the cd with FFVI like in the US as part of the Final Fantasy Anthology? It's not like there wasn't space on the disc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.206.254 (talk) 11:04, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Likely for licensing or regional issues. Unortunately, this is not really the right place to ask this question, as article talk pages are not general-purpose forums for discussing the subject itself. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:49, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

So, out of interest, if i wanted to discuss a wiki article, where would i go? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.206.254 (talk) 21:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Well?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.206.254 (talk) 02:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

A forum related to the game, or a gaming wiki would be better places. --Eruhildo (talk) 04:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

The article states a PAL release never happened. I want to discuss this apparent fact within those who wrote the article. I thought the idea of the 'discussion' page was for people who had read the entry to either point out mistakes, gain clarification, or (as in my case) to ask those more knowledgeable to find out the reasons behind facts as stated. And then to 'discuss' the points raised with them —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.206.254 (talk) 21:14, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, so we can certainly discuss how to get a source in there that adequately backs up the claim in the article (that a PAL release never occurred). Such a source should describe Square's reasons for not including the game in the PAL release. That's fine. But beyond that, I doubt anyone here would be able to answer your question with any real authority - at best, people like me would be speculating. Also, the article itself may only say that such a release never happened without trying to explain why. The fact that it didn't happen is easy for anyone to determine. But unless we can find a reliable source that explains why the release didn't happen, we can't really do much more than just say it didn't happen.
It's kind of a fine line: The original question asked here was "Why wasn't it released?", and that's the type of question you'd usually find in a gaming forum where people are likely to either directly answer the question or venture guesses about it. In such places, you'll less often find people who'll link you to an article about it. Hence the "WP is not a forum" response. What you're saying now, though, is that the article doesn't sufficiently explain why the release never happened. That's something we definitely CAN discuss here - now you're asking for people who are able or willing to do the research (and/or have the knowledge already) to contribute to the content. I think that's great.
That said, I personally can't really help you much, but I hope others here can. :) — KieferSkunk (talk) — 01:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, what he said. Basically, Wikipedia talk pages are meant for discussing ways to improve the related article. --Eruhildo (talk) 03:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

So we can't have a discussion on the topic itself, merely the given entry? Fair enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.206.254 (talk) 13:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The box art

"Chrono Trigger's North American cover art shows the party casting the triple tech Arc Impulse" I think not. Arc Impulse is an ice technique of three characters, but Marle is somehow casting a fire spell and Frog lies in the snow. It seems to me they made the boxart before it was decided that Marle was a ice magician. Zebbe (talk) 19:31, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I think you need to refresh your memory of the tech. It's clearly what the cover art depicts. Kariteh (talk) 21:03, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Nope, the flame is blue in the game and orange on the boxart. Clearly unsimilar. Zebbe (talk) 13:54, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
The flames flash between blue and red (perhaps it's hard to see on YouTube). Kariteh (talk) 14:02, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Problem solved: I changed the caption to read "casting a triple tech", to indicate that triple-techs are an important part of the game, but also to generalize it so we don't have to quibble over specifically which triple-tech it is. Your average layman who knows nothing about the game isn't going to care what the name of the triple-tech is. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 15:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Development section update?

According to director Kitase, Final Fantasy VII was in development for the SNES around that time, but the project was scrapped in favour of Chrono Trigger,[1] and some ideas for that original FFVII (which was supposed to take place in New York in 1999) were used in Chrono Trigger and later Parasite Eve instead of FFVII.[2] Should these information be added to the article? Can anyone locate the sources? Kariteh (talk) 15:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Not sure if Neogaf.com is a reliable source - I don't think I'd qualify it as such. It shouldn't be too difficult to find the source of the interview, though. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 15:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, that's why I asked if the sources (magazines) could be located. Anyone knows what "Level Magazine" is anyway? I hope it's not Japanese, that would make locating it more difficult... Kariteh (talk) 15:58, 28 May 2008 (UTC)