Talk:LucasArts
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. | |
| High | This article is on a subject of High priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0. | |
|
VG To-do:
|
||
Contents |
[edit] Question
Why are Lucasarts succesful Non-Starwars games like Gladius and Secret Weapons Over Normandy not mentioned?
- This is a wiki - go ahead and mention them :) --HappyDog 19:22, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Those were "successful" titles? -- JH
What section should Mercenaries: Playground of Destruction go? It seems to be Lucasarts only action game.
- I would hardly call Mercenaries their *only* action game. -- JH
What about the mortimer and the riddles of the medallion game? that's a lucas arts one
The article needs cleaning and restructuring. The product history of the company should IMHO be categorized either by genre or in chronological order, not a mix of the two as in the current version. I'll do my best to help when I get a chance. - Jopo 08:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
- I agree. I have thought about how this would best be organized for some time. I think we should retain the Origins section - maybe rename it History and add the organizational and name changes there. Maybe the early games could also stay there, as they are hard to categorize (Ballblazer, Fractalus, etc.). Other obvious article sections would be one for the Adventure games and one for the Star Wars games. And maybe one more for "other games". Maybe subsections for that category, for the military simulations, for example. TerokNor 11:01, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with you on the origins of the company and the early games - the history of the company up until 1987 (and the release of Maniac Mansion) could easily be fit into one section. However, I don't feel that adventure and Star Wars sections would be logical, as the former is based on genre and the latter on subject matter. Besides, the scope of Star Wars games has expanded - games based on the movie series can be found in nearly every major genre.
-
- I would personally go with genre-specific sections. Besides, as there are separate articles for e.g. LucasArts adventure games and the X-Wing series, the main LucasArts article could work as a summary page for the progress of each genre and then link to the main articles for more specific information.
- --Jopo 07:41, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Is it really appropriate to classify Mixnmojo as a LucasArts fanpage at this point? For now, they seem to be mostly derisive of the company, and Ward in particular (with good reason, IMO, but I won't get into that)71.234.69.238 18:29, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Star Wars Galaxies is having lots of problems, I won't call it successful. Subscriber numbers are falling and the NGE rework changed the face of the game in its core totally
I may be wrong about this, but the article says "Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe, for instance, was accompanied by a 224-page historical manual." But my copy of the manual is only 89 pages (plus 4 pages of index at the front) and while it contains historical information (about what the planes looked like), over half is in-game controls so this does not qualify as a 'historical manual' in my opinion.99.236.149.189 21:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- MobyGames features an ad blurb from the time of the game's release which mentions the page count of the manual. Do you have the original release or perhaps a re-release which are usually trimmed down in content? --Jopo 06:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Template?
How come there's no Lucasarts template? Would such a template be too large? Or has no one considered one yet? --Thaddius 13:46, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
- I think it would be useful. I could create it if no one objects. --Mika1h 16:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Some more information hopefully
Next Generation released an article about LucasArts. You can find it at http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3703&Itemid=2 -- ReyBrujo 03:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Logo
Haven't there been other logos similar to LucasArts' guy? I think I've seen some that also reminded me of LA, although now I can't remember any. I also just happened upon a site called Softonic which has a logo which is pretty similar if you ask me. I suppose there's no reason to mention this in the actual article though. Retodon8 11:55, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Anti-PC/Nintendo, Anti-Adventure policy
Something I miss in the Wiki are some of the 'bad' decisions LucasArts is making lately. The most well known is the Anti-Adventure games policy started by president Jim Ward. I don't have his literaly quote, but it was something like "There will be no more adventure-games till either I leave or 2017." Should be easy to find. It really pissed off a lot of old LucasArts fans and adventure-game lovers, resulting in internetprotests en boycotting of LucasArts games. It seemed to go in the right direction again with the announcement of Full Throttle 2 and Sam & Max, but they were inevitably cancelled. Many of the old, hardcore LucasArts fans went on to support company's like Tell Tale Games (Sam & Max) and Tim Schafer's Double Fine Productions (Grim Fandango -> Psychonauts).
Another thing is the choice of platform the company is choosing to release their games on. LucasArts used to be the 'PC and Nintendo' developer, releasing numerous quality games on the NES, SNES, N64 and old PC's. Yet in the GameCube period, they suddenly switched over to PS2 and Xbox, despite the record-sellings of GameCube launchtitle Rogue Squadron. And in the same period, the PC started to get a lot of mediocre (star wars) games, often direct ports from the 'inferior' consoles. Despite some successes like Knights of the Old Republic, the PC fanbase didn't get the top notch games like they used to. Both platforms suffered quite a blow with the announcement that the next-gen Indiana Jones and Force Unleashed won't get a release on the PC or Wii. PC-users on a lot of fora started to complain about the lack of a good lightsaber-shooter for so long, eventhough LucasArts used to make the very popular Jedi Knight-series. And since the beginning of the Wii concept, people wanted, and LucasArts promised, a Wii-Lightsaber game, which is still hasn't even been officially acknowledged by the company.
I'm not much of a writer, but someone should definitely add it to the Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.126.160.35 (talk) 16:40, August 24, 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:LFGames.jpg
Image:LFGames.jpg 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 16:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Old Remedy logo.gif
Image:Old Remedy logo.gif 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 ensure 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 15:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
