Talk:Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction

Untitled

This article needs to be tidied. Sits69 17:40, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Tidy it then. General Fris' Kahn 00:56, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

For the love of all that is pure someone fix the section on the Smuggler.70.191.250.249 (talk) 19:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Copy and paste from the Ratchet and Clank 5 article

Ratchet and Clank 5 is a nickname for the announced Ratchet and Clank game on the Playstion 3 video game console. Insomniac, the developers making this sequel have not announced the real name for the product, but they have announced they're working on it. At E3 2006 Insomniac showcased a trailer for "Another game we're working on" It showed a city similar to the area of Metropolis, which could be an example of past levels returning to the series. A blimp floated overhead; bearing the symbol of Ratchet and Clank. The trailer showed mechanical robots crossing a bridge, however Ratchet and Clank were not present.

Whoo!

Come on next-gen RYNO! Anyways, I was wondering: Is Future actually in the name, or did whoever added it mean it's coming in the near future? Cuz if it's in the title, then maybe Ratchet and Clank will either be old (At least Ratchet, I really doubt Clank can age) or possibly dead, replaced by maybe a descendant or something... Hell, maybe even one of the clones from size matters... Oh well, I'll see when more info is released, cuz no matter what I'm not missing out on this game Midgitboy 16:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Its in the name. The name is Ratchet & Clank Future with the subtitle Tools of Destruction. It is supposed to emphasis the PS3 opening more options, differentiate from last gen, and we also learn more about Ratchets (and the lombaxs) future and past. It also emphasis's the futuristic feel of the franchise which is getting more emphasis aswell as emphasis on back to roots platformer gameplay. Check out the podcasts on insomniac games website.

Just wondering. Is it worth noting that the robot Zephyr also shares its name with a level in Spyro 2: Gateway to Glimmer, a previous game by Insomniac?Michael Mad 22:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

And the Zony may or may not have some reference to Sony, har har. Insomniac have a tendency to put references to pop culture and references to their previous games into their games, so anything is possible. Machine758 18:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

New image from 1up

Link

If someone can get copyright clearance, put it as the main image. --Jack Zhang 07:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Quark: Double Agent?

Wouldn't Captain Qwark be a double agent if he's working for the bad guy while giving tips to the good guys? 66.75.21.158 03:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Wait until it actually comes out, and then when you have actually played the game AND seen the story. Until then, it is just speculation.

Yeah, he's a double agent alright. Prepsear (talk) 01:19, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Trailer Screen capture

Anyone willing to do a screen capture of the unwatermarked trailer on insomniacgames.com? Jack Zhang 09:11, 6 April 2007 (UTC)--

Picture Format

Are there any sources which say the game is 720p, Insomniac were trying for 1080p with Resistance: Fall of Man.
1080p could be a very real possibility with Ratchet & Clank Future, so shouldn't the Picture format be unknown for the time being?
Evansam 14:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

The game is out now at my writing and I see that the box does not say 1080i. I will change this on the page.--WhereAmI (talk) 01:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

New Series

I read in EGM that Ratchet and Clank Future is the name of their whole new series for the PlayStation 3. Playstationdude 00:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe, but from what I understand, they are making there new series around the continuing theme of ratchet discovering his roots and past, I'm not sure if the whole series contains the title of "Ratchet and Clank Future" thoughJoebloggs93 08:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Multiplayer

Wasn't it confirmed to not be in this one? Should we add something about that?

Actually it is not confirmed yet. Insomniac has been careful no to let out information on that.

Apparently they want to focus on a much bigger single player game so they wont release any info on it until multiplayer is confirmedJoebloggs93 08:24, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

It has been confirmed that here will be no multiplayer... I'm pissed.

The gameis still quite young..you never know. I'd be very surprised if it turned out to be Single player only, or maybe it's something really special. Machine758 17:56, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

The game looks absolutely incredible, but the fullmoon show episode 12 confirms there will be no multiplayer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.201.99 (talk) 12:39, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh noes! Why!? I was looking forward to buying PS3 and this game. Is there any reason to buy a PS3 now? It looks like I'm going to be getting XBOX 360 and Halo 3 now. Jecowa (talk) 12:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Bit of text that seems out of place

Is it just me or does this text seem like its not for this article or something.

"As part of a collaboration with ABC's Extreme Makeover: Home Edition, you can control a version of James Westbrook, a child from Oklahoma who wanted to become a video game designer but was paralyzed in a car accident. Insomniac stepped in and helped out by putting a fully rendered version of James in the game as a playable character."Bkkeim2000 06:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh well, I'll remove it for now.

Ah damn, just found the link that explains it. Reverting.

Talwyn

Ok, people. Whene there will be a character section on this page, don't put that Talwyn is a lombax, the EGM article made a mistake. James Stevenson, an Isomniac employee, corrected this on the official Insomniac Games forum.

Stretched pic

Is it just me, or does the cover look a bit left-right stretched? Clank looks much wider than he should be. Machine758 09:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

1080i

the newest full moon show podcast has confermed 1080i added to picture format —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.198.139 (talk) 01:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Weapons

We seem to have two separate bits dealing with the weapons. Which should be kept? --HQ 13:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi You dont know me but for Ratchet and clank ToD weapons, ive edited the weapon section and added the 3 new weapons: Leech bomb, nanoswarmers and the confuzzler to the list. These info come out as reported by official insomniac forums.

So would you guys/gals please ask the person to stop deleting the weapon section because my mate wanted to look at the weapons and couldnt find it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.40.188.132 (talk) 17:42, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi, according to some new footage found by members at Insomniac Games forum, the LEECH BOMB (which has 3 ammo) is actually a combat device. All combat devices have 2-4 ammo excluding the Super weapon: Alpha Disruptor which has a few. And the Razor Claws, which say version 1 and has 50 ammo is a weapon.

Can I post it and you can verify? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.83.131.4 (talk) 09:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

According to new videos at gameinformer, the confuzzler is a combat device and the leech bomb, which has 1 ammo is a combat device and quoted as one by Brian, the developer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.40.188.132 (talk) 15:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello there, I just updated the weapon section as this game comes out Nov 9th in Eur and until there are completed faqs of this game, this page should stay. You may know the weapons but others dont. Please be considerate for others, who know not of. Thank you for your consideration and have a nice day! —Preceding unsigned comment added by The-medusa (talk • contribs) 11:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Rating(ESRB)

Why the comment about the american rating in the opening paragraph? Maybe a similar comment could be made when the european ratings come out but on its own it seems kinda american-focused....or maybe its just me tired of seeing us-centric articles elsewhere on wiki? :( John.n-irl 11:25, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Demo

On the Full Moon show, they said that the gamestop demo was the E3 demo; but the one on the PSN was farther in the development. They both were the same level though, Metropolis. Sonicjosh 03:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Release Date Changed... Again?

according to this site - [ http://www.gaming-age.com/news/2007/10/18-54] - the release date has moved back to th 23rd of october. i don't know if this is reliable or not. this is the only site i found this on. should the date be changed again? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.198.139 (talk) 20:18, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

now this is confusing... this article - [1] - says that the release date is still officialy the 30th but some retail stores will get it early enough to sell it on the 23rd --72.94.198.139 21:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

From Official Playstation blog

As frequent Playstation.Blog readers will remember, about two weeks back we announced Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction had gone gold and would ship to stores Oct 30th. Well, due to some unexpected quickness at the factory, a vast majority of retailers have already received the game. With that, some retailers are choosing to release the game next week instead of waiting until the 30th, which we are all too happy to allow :).

Official launch date remains October 30, but for those who can’t wait to use your trigger fingers on the Tornado Launcher (or any other weapon in Ratchet’s arsenal), check with your local game retailer next week.

I changed it to the 30th, since that is the official release date; however. I think that maybe we should put a note in about it so people don't get confused, at least until the 30th?
Sonicjosh 04:43, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Another release date change is in the UK one, Three Speech has it that it's now the 9th of November, not the 7th: http://threespeech.com/blog/?p=672 Dragonscales 18:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Trivia: Star Wars, Transformers

I'm about 80% of the way through the game, and so far there are tons of pop culture references to various scifi franchises, most notably Star Wars. I'll let other people note those, but one I picked up on was a reference to the Transformers movie (2007): On the elevator, after rescuing Talwyn, a sentry announces to "transport the war-bots to Sector 7". In Transformers, the organization that was holding a "war-bot"(Megatron) was named Sector 7. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.89.64.47 (talk) 00:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Hidden message in release date

First off: Whoever made the message, please refrain from putting it in all caps. All that is needed that you put the message in. And there is no need for "I'm sorry, I just keep getting into edit wars about this". As is simply takes up space in the page.

Also, If the release date in the game is Oct 23rd, then the release date is, in fact, October 23rd. It doesn't matter what the official date was. What matters is what it is now. The game was released in the NTSC-U/C Region on October 23,2007. Therefore, that is what the release date will say. Anything else will cause confusion to the readers, as it did with myself for the past while, and now, thanks to that, I've missed my pre-order.

Thank you for your time. Dengarde ► Complaints 05:04, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

:Edit: Looking at the notice of the change, I can see the reason. However, the release date section should still say the 23rd. I've edited it to an acceptable form, so please leave the dates as is. Dengarde ► Complaints 05:14, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Even though it is obvious, I always like to make sure the release date has a source, even if it's moved; I know there was another game I've edited where the game was available mass-release 2 days before the press release date, but no solid source could back it up, so the date stayed as the original date. A different situation here as there's solid evidence about the week movement, and that in the long term the week offset isn't a notable aspect of the game. --MASEM 05:19, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

How is an early release not notable? I mean, if something gets released a week early, then really, wikipedia would be showing false information by keeping the old one.

But since the source in the release dates seems to be an official source, and says, thought they approved an early release, the official release stays the same, I think it would be best to note both dates in the info box. Mostly because, even though some stores started selling the game early (the true release), some stores still won't be selling it until the official date, simply because it's official. So in this case, it's best to note both dates, for the sake of the article, AND the reader. )for my own case, I emphasize on the reader') Dengarde ► Complaints 06:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Right, I wanted it to say the 30th because that was the official; I went to buy the game on oct 23, and no one had it, the next day (oct 24) Gamestop had it, and target wasn't releasing it till the 30'th.

The 30'th is when every store (should) of released it, saying the 23 could have some people who just look at the release date wondering why most stores (I'm making an assumption on 'most stores') didn't have it; I'll look up a game just to find the release date quite often. I think that having both of the dates is a good idea.

One more thing, I am sorry about putting that hidden comment in all caps, but anonymous editors would change the date thats in the article, AND the comment, thus making it, ineffective; that happend multiple times so I had to do something or else they would keep changing both; once again, very sorry Sonicjosh 21:33, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Any more plot details, please?

Now that the game has been out for some days, can someone who completed the game post a more lengthy plot? The current "Plot" section is pretty short, IMO. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.110.214.247 (talk) 11:53, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

There really isn't much to the plot, but I'm sure a couple more details could be added. Once I finish my 2nd playthrough I'll stay focused into the storyline, looking for anything that could be added. FuzionZero 19:22, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Replayability?

Should there be mention or a section of the game on its replayability, which is common in R&C games. If nobody cares to add it in then I dont mind doing so, aslong as everyone is cool with that. FuzionZero 17:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean challenge mode? I've played this game all the way through (gotten EVERYTHING), and I would be glad to help. -Koryu Obihiro (talk) 00:19, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Gamespot 7.5

Why?JTBX 23:12, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

The reviewer had no professional experience with playing games without Basketballs in them.

MontanaHatchet 11:23, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Cronk & Zephyr

In the article it says that Cronk & Zephyr represent the PlayStation 3 and the Xbox 360 resectively. While I understand that Zephyrs routine system failure, and his assault rifle-like shooting represent the 360, I don't understand how Cronk represents the PS3. Can anyone help me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.165.97 (talk) 01:19, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to know as well. I'd never thought of Cronk and Zephyr as symbols of the two gamings consoles, and I still don't see how the relation is there. Anyone care to explain? -Koryu Obihiro (talk) 23:47, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Zephyr was also the codename for the Xbox 360 Elite: see google See also the reference I added for this section. --JamesBrownJr (talk) 16:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Zephyr said he had "superiour online capibilities", also has a high failure rate. cant remember stuff bout cronk. havent played this for a while. but isomanic always puts easter eggs. like the "MGS4PWNS" one in Resistance 2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkdoom3000 (talk • contribs) 02:06, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Article Name

In Europe, it's known as: "Ratchet & Clank: Tools of Destruction". I suggest we add this to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.165.97 (talk) 07:14, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

This was mentioned at the lead, but we have some anon IP editor that comes by and tries to revert the name to just the EU name (w/o "Future"). I've rewritten the lead as to have the EU name right up there after the NA name. --MASEM 13:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.167.217 (talk) 01:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Possible Inaccuracies

I would like to point out a small list of inaccuracies that I erked me. Some of these are minor, and I would rather make sure everyone is fine with them before learning later that they are indeed true.

"[Clank] also discovers he has a soul."

• After playing through the whole game many times, I think that I would have noticed something remarkable like that.

"Ratchet wins, and destroys the Dimensionator, causing it to collapse itself and the planet into a black hole. As the planet is ripped to pieces around them, Tachyon claims he is the only living person who knows Ratchet's real name and his purpose, and as he is sucked in, yells that they can't get rid of him so easily (hinting he has a way to survive the black hole). The Cragmites are dragged in with him, but Ratchet and Clank narrowly escape."

• First of all, the Dimensionator wasn't destroyed, and if it was, then it was never portrayed. What the article is telling me is that the Dimensionator was destroyed immediately after Tachyon's defeat. Not so; in fact, Ratchet - after repairing it with a replacement part that the Plumber gave them - uses the Dimensionator to get out of the void. The "planet", I believe to be an asteroid, or rock of some sort; the landscape that Ratchet fights in is already in pieces, and it's clear that it is too small to be considered a planet. The second part of the battle with Tachyon takes place in a rift the Dimensionator opens, and thus I consider it implausible they are still on Fastoon.

The Cragmites aren't ever shown being "dragged in with [Tachyon]". That fact may be convenient if Insomniac ever feels the need to introduce Cragmite enemies in another game, and thus I think it is isn't absolute that the Cragmites are gone.

• I've never heard of the character Gummel, unless you are referring to the vendors that are in the game. I don't think it's a hoax, but rather some fan fiction used to explain the vendors' origins.

• I don't think that Ratchet and his father were left behind, rather they chose to stay. Tachyon comments: "Cowards! All of them! There were only two brave enough to stay behind: the guardian of the Dimensionator, and his infant son."

Feel free to correct that quote if it is wrong, as it is from memory.

• "Talwyn's robotic guardians who despise each other. They are meant to represent the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 respectively, constantly mocking each other for their technical faults and praising their own abilities. They had a third partner named Willy (repersenting the Wii), but he was K.I.A. due to his bad habit of jumping up and down and waving his arms whenever he saw any action, so he never appears in the game."

I think that this is just a guess as to what Cronk and Zephyr might symbolize, but "Willy" seems like a satirical attack on the Wii.

Complaining! I added a reference for this comment. And the Willy thing is because "a smartass journalist asked us what happened to the Wii robot, so we gave a smart answer". --JamesBrownJr (talk) 16:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate the feedback. It's not that consider this stuff rubbish, it just needs proper backing. -Koryu Obihiro (talk) 13:53, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

If no one complains, then I'll change the article per above. Koryu Obihiro (talk) 01:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Unlock weapons from previous games

"Unlike Going Commando and Up Your Arsenal, the player cannot unlock weapons from previous games using a memory card, due to their having a much lower polygon count."

I'm not that familiar with PS3, but my understanding was that you couldn't use PS2 memory cards on it. I assume that would be the reason why they didn't include this feature. --JamesBrownJr (talk) 16:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you can, if you have a USB adapter for a memory card (from Sony). This was to enable people to use their memory from the older systems. -Koryu Obihiro (talk) 13:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Another thing here erks me. What does the polygon count have anything to do with it? -Koryu Obihiro (talk) 20:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

They'd look awkward and out of place. The real reason, though, is that Insomniac did want to exclude players from getting those things, as you need the adapter to get to them. --HQ (talk) 20:09, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

If they were bringing an old weapon into the new game, I doubt they'd bring in the exact weapon, polygons and all. They'd probably adapt it to fit the new look and change it to suit the game. Still, that is a point that they wouldn't want to force people to buy an adapter for the sake of a weapon. The one I got was fairly expensive. -Koryu Obihiro (talk) 02:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

That polygon count thing is retarded. Seriously. The weapons included in later games were entirely new, but were only unlocked using data from memory cards. How the hell would the game load weapons from savegame data? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DizzyTech (talk • contribs) 01:20, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Ending

Is it true that Clank does get captured by the Zoni, and that's it? 75.134.82.172 (talk) 04:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it is. We assume that the problem will be resolved in the sequel(s). -Koryu Obihiro (talk) 13:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Bleh, that stinks. Hopefully the sequel won't be in development hell or canceled. 75.134.82.172 (talk) 02:01, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I doubt it will. I think they probably have a timeline written out a couple of games ahead to make sure everything fits together already.--Playstationdude (talk) 20:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Reception

It should be added that it recieved some backlash for not bringing a lot of new things to the game that worked well, as said in the review on gamespot http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/ratchetclank/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;review —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.86.52.122 (talk) 12:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Weird on wikipedia

For some reason when I wanted to edit this page It said Technical issues reception and awards but when I look at the article it doesn't show. Is there an error on wikipedia or it's my PC. The luigi kart assasions 14:50, 3 Febuaray 2008 (UTC)

New Series???

i believe that only in the us it is called ratchet and clank FUTURE tools of destruction while in the rest of the world it is called ratchet and clank tools of destruction. so is it a new series???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dpil237 (talk • contribs) 23:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

• How about you do a bit of research before asking questions such as this?

Currently, we don't know a lot about the setting differences between this game and the others. Wait for an answer. There are some references to older games, but at this point it's hard to say. So please, don't be lazy. Find out for yourself. -Koryu Obihiro (talk) 18:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Help image

Someone wanted to upload their image but failed and now its big help please. The luigi kart assasions 5:25, 13 Febuary 2008 (UTC)

Plot summarisation

Hi, i've carried out 2 edits so far on the plot section in an attempt to summarise it, but detailing the entire plot will still be a very long article. I'm leaning towards scrapping the plot section altogether and putting in a "Plot summary" section which will very briefly detail the major events in the game. Haracas (talk) 06:55, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to support this notion. This article is simply too long, written like a movie review. In the month I've been absent from Wikipedia, I'm still wondering how the article turned out the way it did. Koryu Obihiro (talk) 13:17, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

A cliffhanger leaving an opening for a sequel is POV?

Explain. Now.~~Lazyguythewerewolf . Rawr. 22:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

No objections? I'll add it back in, then.~~Lazyguythewerewolf . Rawr. 19:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

You don't seem to understand that just because the game ends on a cliffhanger doesn't mean that a sequel is absolute. It is probably going to happen but there are obvious circumstances which would prevent this from happening. Since they have not "officially" announced this, it violates Wikipedia per WP:CRYSTAL.Strongsauce (talk) 19:51, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I never said it was absolute. Read edits before going "BLAAAH! DELETE!"~~Lazyguythewerewolf . Rawr. 22:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

You're just nitpicking now. "This leaves the game open for an obvious sequel" is no different from your previous edits stating, "Also, the cliffhanger at the end of the game suggests that another game will be coming in order to complete the story." It is simply just speculation. Strongsauce (talk) 23:15, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I did have a link in one of my reverts, you know. But apparantly you don't like it when you may lose an argument. ~~Lazyguythewerewolf . Rawr. 23:22, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I actually did take the time to look at your link. The interview says it is the beginning of a story arc which they would like to continue telling. Most likely a sequel will be developed however this does not guarantee that a game will actually be made. Since there has been no announcement by Insomniac or Sony of a Tools of Destruction 2, we cannot just say "There will be a sequel based on the cliffhanger ending" because its not true, a cliffhanger does not guarantee a game will be made as MASEM has said below.

I don't know why it is so important to you to have this fact up but fighting with several editors, being incivil, and ignoring Wikipedia rules all leads to you not editing on Wikipedia for very long. I'm not sure exactly what argument I have lost since I never denied that a sequel could happen. Strongsauce (talk) 01:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

There is no confirmation or verification of a sequel - mind you, all sources knowing Insomniac and the popularity of the series say there will be, but WP is based on verifiability and no original research. A cliffhanger does not always imply that it will be resolved. --MASEM 23:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

So, PS3 only?

It won't be made for other gaming systems like the PsP or the PS2?--68.3.18.11 (talk) 16:04, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

More detail please?

"Recognizing that Tachyon plans to use the Dimensionator to bring back the Cragmites from banishment, Ratchet and Clank recover it first, but Captain Qwark shows up and tries to destroy it himself; the blunder allows Tachyon to recover the device."

What blunder? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Megaman en m (talk • contribs) 15:39, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Link for development info

[2] - I will likely add some to the article from this but if anyone wants to go ahead... --MASEM 18:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Mukow glitch section

Can somebody rewrite the Mukow glitch section. My grammer isn't good. HK22 (talk) 04:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

This glitch isn't really as notable as the HDD one - the source being only a board posting. The HDD was more notable as it prevented people from playing the game completely and had to be remedied. --MASEM 05:49, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok then. — HK22 \my contributions/ ^{(my talk)} 08:12, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Did anyone else seriously not notice?

"The weapon it upgrades into (the Alpha Canon) is the most powerful in the game's arsenal in terms of single shots with a power level of over 9,000."

I just looked up the actual level, and it is actually ~8,800; but nice try whoever got that in there — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.249.139.92 (talk) 05:55, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Removal of HDD glitch section

I think that section should be removed as noted here with some diffs and an explanation. In its current state, it doesn't belong. One section devoted to a small issue that didn't really draw any criticism ("near universal acclaim"). All it needs is a brief mention in the lead (like there already is) and anything that may touch on it from a review in the reception section. It isn't important. —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:58, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

The glitch may not be notable to be mentioned. As the source suggests, the HDD glitch is a minor glitch. Extensive coverage like this is completely unnecessary. AdrianGamer (talk) 08:15, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Can a site like "shacknews" even be considered a RS, even by WP:VG/RS standards? C'mon. ^BLUSTER⌉⌊_BLASTER 19:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

oops, consider me corrected. Still, I don't really think it's something that needs coverage in its own section/paragraph unless there were other significant problems with the game that merit mentioning per the opinion of RSes. WP:UNDUE and all, not to mention the structural problems it causes with the prose, with being a tiny paragraph like that all cordoned off from the rest. ^BLUSTER⌉⌊_BLASTER 20:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

So. It should be removed now? If anybody else was to come join this discussion they'll probably agree that it should be removed. Three editors here think it should be removed and those two editors at the Teahouse seemed to imply they think it should be removed. —DangerousJXD (talk) 22:01, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I think you can remove it now. Perhaps link here (or at least say "per talk") in your edit summary. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 22:14, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

So, IP-- I see you've reverted it again in spite of the discussion here. What's your reasoning? ^BLUSTER⌉⌊_BLASTER 15:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)