Talk:Soldier of Fortune (video game)
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. | |
|
VG To-do:
|
||
[edit] Soldier of Fortune and Soldier of Fortune II: Double Helix
Should this be split into two articles? Orange Goblin 11:00, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, I reckon. —Pengo 05:42, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
- I aggre it they need to be spilt. Bjweeks 04:43, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] A Realistic And Accurate Shooter
You've got to me kidding me. It's Wolfenstein 2000.
(and as a result, it's probably the best mindless game I've ever played, same perhaps for Painkiller)
I don't understand why the PR dept insisted on marketing this thing as realistic and gritty (actually, I do - it was probably to try and stir up controversy), but even the developers clearly knew they were making a thrill-kill blastfest - there's even a level that has you fighting (neo-)Nazis in a German castle. They couldn't spell it out any more clearly.
Anyway, my point is that this ridiculous misrepresentation should not spill into the Wikipedia entry. I shall fix this later, I guess.--Gwilym 19:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Criticism Section
Gwilym, no offense, but I frankly don't care about your personal opinion, or the opinion of the guy who wrote the things about realism in the article. This is an encyclopedia, and for that very purpose, any opinionated statements should be excluded from any and all articles except in the event that they are annotated as quotes in the criticism section of a particular form of media. For instance, it is important to note the criticism a video game or book recieved from specific critics and general audiences, but the content in the encyclopedia should not denote a bias to any one of these criticisms. Therefore, I will change the criticism section to an unvbiased and objective list of seperate criticisms in quotations from specific critics, rather than what it is now: a biased and opinionated paragraph with no objectivitiy whatsoever. ManofRenown87 23:21, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
