Talk:MDK2

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.
Start This article has been rated as Start-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:

Regarding the name... First off, in the original game wasn't the robot dog known as "Bones"? If that's true, as I think it is, then MDK couldn't stand for Max, Doc, Kurt. Secondly, there was a lot of interest when the original game came out regarding what MDK stood for. The folks at Shiny entertainment made quite a lot of this; they alternatively said it stood for nothing or that it stood for various things. It was quite a big joke (on the public, by them). Further, when MDK2 came out, BioWare continued having fun with this; they too offered various explanations, including that it stood for nothing at all. So, who "generally accepted" the Max-Doc-Kurt definition? Gregmg 04:54, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nope, It means something much more puzzling, which is still yet to be discovered, but 'Mission Deliver Kindness' or 'Murder Death Kill' suits me fine. --Fr3k3r 20:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Release date

I've just added an infobox to the article, but I'm not totally sure about the release date. The one I have is from IGN, but they seem to claim that there was no European release. --Dave2 28 June 2005 16:20 (UTC)

Your recent edits add a lot to this page. Good stuff. Regarding the release date, I was thinking that the US Dreamcast version came out around 4/1/2000. I'll see if I can confirm that. I think the PC version came out a bit later, perhaps in May. I know that they prepared a European Dreamcast version because I remember Greg Z. at BioWare discussing the Italian voice acting on the old Interplay forum. Whether or not they actually released it in Europe, I don't know. Gregmg 28 June 2005 17:20 (UTC)

[edit] MobyGames link

Wikipedia:External_links specifically

Sites that contain neutral and accurate material not already in the article. Ideally this content should be integrated into the Wikipedia article, then the link would remain as a reference.
Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as textbooks or reviews.

My rationale is credits, extensive cover art and screenshots

As always your opinions/comments are welcome. --Flipkin 16:53, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, we already have cover art and screen shots. I guess we just need to integrate the credits. Next time I power up my Dreamcast, I'll transcribe the credits. What's the Wikipedia convention for who to include? I seem to remember the MDK2 credits including their IT people, the office admin, janitor, etc. I would think that the credits should be limited to a dozen or so key people. Gregmg 19:23, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
David, I found the time to load up MDK2 and jot down the credits. I've added an abbreviated list to the article. I then checked out the link to your site. First, the game's name is MDK2. There's no space betweek the K and the 2. Second, I noticed that you featured Interplay personnel prominently in the credits on your site. I have nothing against the folks at Interplay, but they had virtually nothing to do with this game. They did little more than a quick test of the release and pre-release versions. There was also a licensing and distribution agreement... which Interplay violated. About the credits... the in-game credits include a lot of people. The MDK2 poster that they signed and sent to me only has 23 signatures on it. I certainly don't believe that they would have gone to any effort to make sure that they had all of the key people sign it, or limit the signatures to just the key people, but it kind of gives one a sense of how many people were heavily involved. My point is, I think the abbreviated list is the way to go. I'm not sure why other game articles don't include even a short list of credits. You'd be hard-pressed to find a movie or book article without the actors, director, or author listed. It seems like the right thing to do with game articles.
Also, I added a few links for the groups that provided the voice talent. I may reconsider this though simply because they are both graphic-rich sites that take a while to load. So, I understand why you want to include the link to your site, but as I've said elsewhere, these links need to be considered on a case by case basis. In this case, I just don't think your link is adding any value to the article and there's no evidence it was used as a reference in the creation of any content in this article. I can see arguments both ways on the addition of the link to your site. One could argue that the comprehensive (although biased in favor of Interplay) listing of credits is relevant, appropriate, and adds value to the article. One could also argue that this qualifies as link spam. I hope someone else (not associated with your site) chimes in on this. It would be nice to have an independent perspective. Gregmg 04:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Depends. Dreamcast credits are different from the Windows credits. I believe in the console version the publisher had a larger role. --Flipkin 15:01, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
This article concerns the Dreamcast version. I was very interested in this game after trying out the Dreamcast demo and followed the pre-release and post-release activities closely. I'm quite confident that Interplay did little more than assist with final testing and coordinate the distribution. I'm not saying that their people shouldn't be listed in a full listing of credits, but they need not be featured so prominently as they had very little to do with it. Gregmg 15:56, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you on the case by case basis. If the consensus does not agree with the argument it will not be the first time I was wrong *smile*. Whether Interplay had a huge role in the development or not I believe the credits are in the order they are printed in the manual. I believe the game was developed on Windows and ported to Dreamcast. Since Interplay published the Dreamcast game it is obvious why their credits are so prevalent. --Flipkin 17:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
MDK2 was developed first and foremost for the Dreamcast. The PC release came along later. It wasn't a port of a PC game. Gregmg 18:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Yeah. Right after I wrote that I did a little more research. You are correct. --Flipkin 18:35, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MDK2 related with Metallica

Does somebody have information that MDK2 is related with the heavy metal band Metallica? The game cover is a picture of Max, Kurt and Doctor wich is a imitation of one of the Metallica's promotional photo. --Aeternus 11:05, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

MDK2 is filled with pop culture references. The cover is supposed to be reminiscent of the Charlie's Angels pose. There is no relation between the American heavy metal band and this game. Gregmg 14:38, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
And why then, while Zizzy Ballooba is dying, the last words he says are "Fade to Black"? --ΛэтєяиuS 10:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
"Fade to black" is stage terminology which describes a fairly common method for ending scenes or productions. Any tie to Metallica is dubious at best.

[edit] Citations

Most of the information in the article comes straight from the game; either from in the game or from the game insert. What's the proper format for citing the game itself as the source for these facts? Gregmg 14:38, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Feel free to edit plot again

I liked the plot being written out, but found it was a drag to read, so I split it up into several sections/chapters, also I added a link for the MDK3 petition added on from MDKs' article page. --Fr3k3r 20:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Does 'The Name' section have to be here?

The article for MDK has a brilliant indepth written meaning of what MDK could possibly mean, is there any reason for a similar Name origin paragraph here? Isn't it better just to say that the name stands for each first inital of the protaganists?

Also, yes, I believe Maxs' original name was Bones. Maybe this was just a codename for him as a biological weapon.--Fr3k3r 20:10, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

What exactly MDK stands for has been the subject of much speculation since the release of the first game. After the release of MDK2, the folks at BioWare had a lot of fun playing with this issue. I believe it merits some mention, but feel free to move or revise this section. Also, I don't believe you can say that it stands for the initials of the protaganists since no one at Shiny or BioWare has ever stated this. There are a variety of definitions for this initialism, but none have every been confirmed as correct by the folks who made the game(s). Gregmg 15:32, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Petition links

There has been interest on this article and elsewhere to include links to online petitions for new releases of games. I have removed several because these links don't appear to pass muster with the External links guide. Here is my rational.

-These links add no value to the article. Per the External links guide, links should be kept at a minimum and be meritable. The guide also mentions the need for linked sites to provide meaningful, relevant content. I don't believe a petition has any content that could be considered meaninful or meritable.
-While petition links are not specifically mentioned in the External links guide, item #10 under the Links normally to be avoided does mention social networking sites and discussion forums. A Usenet group will likely have far more meaninful, relevant, and meritable information than a petition, and if that doesn't pass muster, than neither does a petition.
-Item #13 in the same section discusses pages that are directly related to the article subject versus those that are indirectly related. A petition link does not seem to be symmetrically related to the game in question.
-I believe that the inclusion of a link to a petition goes against the spirit of the policy on Conflicts of interest. I don't want to speculate on the motivations of other Wikipedians, but I do believe there's the possibility that others may be including such links not out of an interest in providing meaningful, relevant information to the user, but instead to promote the creation of a new version of the game in question.
-Finally, I don't believe that a petition passes muster on the Longevity test. Petitions come and go, and I'm not sure that such a link will be available for the forseeable future.

Please review the External links guide carefully and discuss further here. Gregmg 16:00, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia rules of content?!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Computer_and_video_games#Style this should be read, as this is FAR more relevant to this Article.--Fr3k3r 18:17, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Is there a conflict between this style guide and any other? If so, we should encourage the larger community to resolve this. At the moment, I can't find anything relevant to our previous discussion. Gregmg 15:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Link? Community? Canon?

Okay, I can understand the above, but this petition http://www.petitiononline.com/newmdk3/petition.html may possibly help the MDK community, judging by the fact the MDK series wikis even being started and added onto, THERE is a community. If the petition fails, fine, delete it, the link is NOT my own petition, but found in the MDK2 forum on Bioware's site, yes, (its only got 17 signatures, but what the heck, you've got to start somewhere.)

[edit] What the community gets out of the link

  • Think of this petition as a marketing scheme, people look up MDK2 or MDK, people look up the petition for a third one. As a third one, I mean to END as a trilogy. Think of the technology they could do now. Kurt and the guys could drive veichles like in Halo and 'borrow' many elements from games that they 'borrowed' from the original MDK anyway.
  • The disability not to have the optional link to a 'fan site' or 'community' of the game which the article actually refers to, does not make sense in my opinion, even though this breaks the above law/s of Wikipedia. Most other game related wiki pages, have a link to a 'community based site', this apparently makes the article unfit for Wikipedia.

[edit] The MDK2 pages status

  • At the moment this page is in tatters, with unnessercary sections and looks un-encylopedic (if theres such a hyphonated word) BUT is a very good starting point for what could be a fully indepth article, providing the page is contributed to and tidied up credits are not required as a section because a relevant link can be found on IMDB.

[edit] To NOT make the game forgotten

  • I don't think that the guys at Wiki would care if we had one measly link to a petition towards a third game.

Whatever happens with this link on the page I think we should keep the link on the [original MDK page] and keep that as the 'introductory page' for the wiki tree of MDK, as I think its a fully unbiased and informatic article. Yes, I have typed a lot on that, but it was started by a very great collection of Wikipedians in my opinion; typing the game system it was for etc, the technology, the meaning of MDK and was very solid ground for a article; I just added things in the article that made the game UNIQUE based on the 'world' of the game, not the actual game itself, the ideas behind it all. Sometimes games are played about the concept, world, and imagination of the developers.

[edit] To clean up

  • I would like to see; with a LOT of help, this page unbiased and fit for newcomers and fans. Its also coming up to MDKs 10th anniversary next year. I don't want to fall out with anybody here, but with the current warning of 'original research' heading on the MDK2 page, I think that Wikipedia have more to worry about then one 'community' link.
All in all the article isn't in such bad shape. I think all of the main points are covered. Your edits have helped a great deal. I have been concerned however about some of the glowing language in the article (and that isn't directed at your edits necessarily). It's actually a common problem in game related articles. We are all so accustomed to reading fan and game websites, and game magazines, that we tend to write in the same style. As time permits, I'll make some minor revisions to make it read better. Gregmg 16:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Furthering the Community

  • Also, changing the conversation, hows the idea of making a REAL community website for the MDK series to send fan art, fan fiction, comics on etc? Suprisingly enough, there is MDK fan art on the net, (no ,NOT mine) quite a few Kurt Hectic pictures on deviantArt, and once was a page of a few fan fictions a few years ago.

Then we could actually put the link to the petition on it as it wouldn't be against the 'Ten commandments of Wikipedia that-apparently-no-other-game-or-movie-related-page-breaks'.

  • Maybe, perhaps, the contributers of the MDK pages could make ANOTHER petition that could last, a real petition for the community. Instead of the one linked from Bioware forums. Then we could delete this one that 'doesn't have longetivity'

[edit] 'Many Derivatives Konsidered'

  • MDK2 is as much a part of MDK at is a well developed sequel by another talented team of loonatics with no direct loss of feeling of the first one.
  • Next easter, April 2007 it will be exactly 10 years ago the first one came out, We should celebrate it and try as hard as we can to get a finale.
  • If you look at the status of Third Person shooters before MDK and its sequel, you'll find, its just as important as Doom and Halflife. So without MDK and MDK2...bye bye: Max Payne series, Giants: Citizen Kabuto, Ratchet and Clank series, Metal Arms, Freedom Fighters, GTA3 series and onwards, and the recent Gears of War.

If I was American, that would be my two cents, but I'm not. I'm British, and thats my opinion. So there.

Please to my [talk page] and give me a comment of YOUR opinion, or you could just call me a geek and hate me forever. OTT fan of MDK --Fr3k3r 18:03, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

You've brought up several points, which I will try to address.
- Canon - You seem to be suggesting that the petition is essentially part of the MDK2 story at this point, and deserves to be referenced in the article. The External links guide specifically differentiates between external sources that are directly related and those that are indirectly related to the article subject, and a petition link certainly seems to be in the latter category. As such, we are discouraged from linking to it.
- Benefit to the community. - Wikipedia is governed by the concensus of the community (Wikipedia community) and by the edicts of Jimbo Wales. The goal, in essense, is to provide a free encyclopedia to the world. Other goals and objectives, no matter how worthwhile, are not part of the equation and do not play a role in determining what is encyclopedic, notable, and worthy of mention in Wikipedia articles.
- Petition links appear on other articles. - Many articles don't conform to the Wikipedia policies and guidelines, but that doesn't make them right or good examples. Please take a look at the Featured Articles. They offer the best example of what we should strive to accomplish with this article.
I doubt you'll ever encounter a bigger MDK2 fan than me. No one would be happier than me to see MDK3 produced and released. However, Wikipedia exists soley to provide free information to the world. We must abide by rules set forth to that end. If you genuinely believe that these policies are in error, I encourage you to engage the larger community in a discussion on this. This talk page simply doesn't have the attention required of the larger community to effect such change. Gregmg 16:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This could be heaven for everyone...


Well, is there a possible Wiki, other then Wikipedia related that runs on Wikimedia that we could type up about the MDK series and other Shiny and Planet Moon games that is entirelly community driven? (even if its two of us, and we could link to THAT site, as it would be a verifiable wiki) You see these games changed the way I saw things; the way I like games, the way I play, what I care more for games, forget the graphics, think the imagery I always marvel at the concept art and the plot, how humorous the game can be etc. I find a lot of games dry now since the likes of Armed and Dangerous. Now I really only get my fix of games with Ratchet and Clank (and recently because of looking up Metal Arms' article on Wikipedia).

Gregmg, I know you must be a busy guy, (looking at your page you are) but how does the idea of this sound? a possible wiki or even website especially for the content of the game, instead of a actual criticism the actual game itself. "It has good graphics...blah, blah, its runs on..., it has puzzles..., ...for a game its average..."

But how about, Instead of the above, it actually explains to the user the background of the game, and if possible, really try to work with the developers as it would be a public project for the history computer games?

And yes, be community based, as thats what most of the internet is about now, Myspace, Youtube, Blogger etc. Wikipedia appears to be the odd one out with too many limiting rules, too many directives, its like I'm reading stuff written by robots. I know it was supposed to a free content encylopedia, but with so many different 'trees' and Articles and wikiprojects, Its like 'Google' in a encylopedia. You can find ANYTHING here. TV, Movies, plays and other works of literature seems to be able to have recorded history of background plots, characters, props etc. I know its supposed to be a encyclopedia, but don't you think its becoming more than that? It even has Myspace 'celebrities' on this, why? This is not relevant! Its not art, its not music, its not history, not literature and its definatly NOT pop culture.

But very few games are allowed this; Just because they're not widely known, I thought that inventions like encyclopedias (the books not online) and other of forms reference databases were for this; how is that a example of recording history and literature? I'm not saying: "w00t! Lets copy the instruction book!"'

I'm saying for people to stop making video game articles that leave you on a limb like:

'"This is a game, it is played on (insert platform), you play as this person/thing, (spoiler) that happens, then this (end spoiler), trivia (if there is any), external links (A critising website on the review of the game, other then critizing or praising the universe its set in; which I would expect would make the developers happy, as that is what most of the hard work is about, IMO)"' and thats a basic Wikipedia Computer Game article.

Just look at the [[1]halo] section of Wikipedia, thats just ridiculous for a franchise, even Star Trek nor Star Wars has a section that large and varied, (but its informative, having a link between each game and book) also, if you look, it links to [[2]Marathon] (a previous trilogy of games by Bungie that carry references to each other, giving a spiritual link to the games.)

Last of all:

Does the (Not-Wikipedia based computer game wiki project) sound possible? does it already exist? can I join it? does it have these contradicting laws?

I know this is very off topic, (and long) but as you see, I have different views on what would make a good computer game Wiki-Article. But it appears we have a similar view of what exactly makes a good game. I didn't leave this on your talk page, as I think people should be addressed to this possibility and the contradicting laws against writing a video game article in Wikipedia. Also, it would of took up a lot of your room. ;) --Fr3k3r 20:47, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Regarding linking to other Wiki's, this subject came up on the Wine page a while back. A contributor kept adding a link to a wine wiki that was largely devoid of any information. His rationale was that it would only grow and flourish if traffic could be directed there from here. Unfortunately, that wasn't a good reason for the Wikipedia article to link there, so a number of other Wikipedians (myself included) objected and removed the link. The rules for external linking are somewhat flexible; if you can find or produce a fan or wiki page related to MDK that has more information to offer than what we have here, perhaps your fellow Wikipedians would allow it to stay. I for one would rather see your energies directed to making this article better. Anything that is notable and encyclopedic should be included in this article. I remember several interviews with Greg Zeschuk that were published online when MDK2 was released; in these interviews he discussed briefly some alternate storylines that were considered. If you can dig up any of this stuff it would be a great addition to the article. Anything else that you can find that passes the test for notability would be great as well.
I don't have time at the moment to address the other points you've raised. I will try to respond a bit later. Keep up the good work! Gregmg 15:59, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to of left the page for so long, but ATM, MDK is top priority. 10th anniversary for that one, also. Anyway I'll continue for searching for rare info and stuff and try to make it comply with the Wikipedia laws. Also, about the website. It is an idea slowly brewing in my head and hope to get everybody elses heads brewing for this idea. But first theres a fair bit of emailing and talking to do...I'm not quite sure if I'm up for that. Anybody else?--Fr3k3r 05:36, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Plot

If someone was to clean up the plot section and condense it into one section, not a broken up level by level thing, it would be far, far more effective and less ameaturish. Also, eliminating/getting the REAL level names would help. Fluke 21:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

^Sorry, that was my fault, forgot the level names you see. Also, I didn't have the heart to delete someone else's huge wad of text, so I just tried to make it look more readable in sections then just a awful, terrible block of text with a picture next to it and a strain on the eyes. (This was on very, very, very early Wiki days...I know about history now.) A rewrite would be good. But, please, if anyone else does it, generally shorter...and also, please, anybody now...vistors, Wikipedians; NO entire word for word instruction book copies, I can't stand that kind of thing and I'm pretty sure that wouldn't read very well, anyway!--Fr3k3r 05:46, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This is an encyclopedia

The recent edits by an anonymous contributor have taken the article further away from an encyclopedia format. I'm loathe to revert these edits, because some good information has been added. We really need to clean up this article. I'll try to find the time to do so later, but please, if you are editing this article, please adhere to the various wikipedia style guides. You might want to start here. Thanks! Gregmg 15:30, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Longshot

Something interestingthis is the site of the designer of the offical MDK2 website for Bioware... If you look further down, there a screenshot be.

Here be the screenshot on the page

Maybe theres some valid information about MDK2 that got removed for the smaller Bioware MDK2 section. Maybe its worth asking the author of the content of the site...anyone want to follow up?

The author does allow special requests for the site to be sent...--Fr3k3r 06:34, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:MDK2 Packshot.jpeg

Image:MDK2 Packshot.jpeg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)