Talk:Phantasy Star (series)
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. | |
 |
This article was previously selected for Gaming Collaboration of the week. | |
|
VG To-do:
|
||
 |
This article is within the scope of the The Sega Project, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Sega products. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
|
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| High | This article is on a subject of High priority within The Sega Project | |
|
Sega Project To-do List:
|
||
[edit] Release Info
Why has someone stated that Phantasy Star Generation 1 will soon be released in North America? SEGA have never stated that it will be.
- Phantasy Star Generation 1 was originally meant to be released independently from the other two remakes by Conspiracy Games in North America. As the story goes, Sony Computer Entertainment of America told them that the game 'wasn't high enough quality to be released on its own.' It boggles my mind, personally; I've seen a lot of the other stuff they've approved. VanGarrett 01:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
The history section claimed that Phantasy Star (Dec. 20, 1987) beat Dragon Quest (May 27, 1986) and Final Fantasy (Dec. 18, 1987) to the market, which isn't the case, so I altered this. -Jonas
- Perhaps the author was thinking of the North American release. Unless I'm mistaken Phantasy Star was released in North America before the other two. Priest4hire 07:44, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
-
- You aren't mistaken. It was out before the other two in the US. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.75.40.170 (talk) 06:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC).
The Fan Contributions section is disjointed and either needs to contain more information or be cut completely. The second sentence isn't even a complete sentence, nor is it capitalized.
[edit] PSU planet confusion.
Someone made a poor assumption when they added Parum to the list of names for Palma, and Moatoob to the list of names for Motavia. Parum and Moatoob are planets from Phantasy Star Universe, rather than from the classic series, and there is no clear connection between the classic series and the Universe series; nor does the classic series' storyline offer any room to indicate that the Gurhal system is, in fact, the Algol system. The classic series featured a temperate planet, a desert planet and an ice planet. PSU features two temperate planets and a desert planet. The number of planets is consistent, I suppose, but in the timeline of the original Phantasy Star, settlement of Motavia and Dezolis was something that had occured within the lifetimes of mid-aged people. Phantasy Star Universe's timeline has the settlement of Neudaiz and Moatoob at several hundred years prior to the begining of the game; the three planets have been settled long enough for the three daughter-races of the humans, Cast, Newman and Beast, to have waged a 500-year war against their creators to secure equal-rights.
With Palma having been destroyed in Phantasy Star 2, for Gurhal to be Algol, Phantasy Star Universe would have to take place possibly hundreds of millenia prior to the original Phantasy Star; long enough for at the very least, the Beast and Newman races to become extinct (or at the very least, to evolve into Motavians and Dezolians respectively; though to go from human-skinned and long-eared to green-skinned and earless, that is beyond me), the Cast race to be torn down from their position of supremacy and subsequently made to be the subserviant slaves of the human race they were to begin with, and most importantly, long enough for any apparent civilization on Moatoob to vanish, as well as for Neudaiz to freeze over. The differences are just too great. If the classic and Universe series are even in the same universe, they are clearly, at the very least, different solar systems. VanGarrett 01:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Agreed its homage and nothing more. Numans werent created until Phant 2 and it cant be after because Palma was destroyed. Also the Seed Infestation is coming from outside of the Gurhal system not from a Seal within the actual system itself (PsyGuy 2nd 13:26, 16 March 2007 (UTC))
[edit] Fan Controversies
Admittedly there WAS confusion about Lutz's gender and the Noah moniker but this has long since been cleared up due to the fact we KNOW the original creators always intended him to be called Lutz. Noah is the name of the Earthmens ship in Phant 2 nothing more.(PsyGuy 2nd 13:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC))
Well... First off... The article lists simply that it was a source of conflict, which is true. As for it being cleared up... no, it's not. There are still those who will argue that Noah is not Lutz. Mike Ripplinger's defense of that position has always been quite thorough, and as far as I know, he's still unmoved from it (though he has long since left the Phantasy Star community). I believe that Maxx also stands by Noah and Lutz being separate individuals. You have to remember that the argument gets brought up that what the original Japanese writers intended has very little bearing on what was created when it was localized. You have to maintain the knowledge that though there are a great deal of similarities between the Japanese Phantasy Star and the English-language Phantasy Star, there are still a great deal of subtle differences, as well. I submit that it's best to look at it in a similar context to Greek mythology; there are multiple versions of the stories, but none is really any more true than another.
So no, as silly as it is, it still hasn't been resolved. VanGarrett 23:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Just because two high-profile (and when it comes to theories, highly questionable) people refuse to submit to logic doesn't mean it hasn't been resolved in the community at large. BenoitRen 21:53, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
It doesn’t need to be resolved. The canon is what matters and Even in US version Noah is Lutz:
Lutz killed LaShiec: Rune said the first generation lutz killed lashiec. Also the 1st generation lutz is lutz from PS2. Why? Because
in PSIV Rune clearly stated that the first generation lutz placed the aeroprism in soldiers temple. We know the last person who used the aeroprism was Rolf (Lutz gave it to him), so 1st generation Lutz recovered the prism and placed it in soldiers' temple until Rune and Chaz came to get it.
It could not be any other Lutz, if so it would be called "2nd generation lutz" since lutz from PS2 was already named "lutz". Unless of course, you believe that Noah (1st lutz) was still alive after PSII... but since in PSII Lutz stated that he was the last telemental of Algol, that's not possible.
What's wrong with these guys?
I would agree with this point if this was an ambiguous subject, but it isn’t'... so we shouldn't give any credit to that. There is a lot more interesting information to write in this article. 213.63.2.46 (talk) 14:52, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] List cleanup
The Games list doesn't need cleanup at all. It's complete and thorough. I don't understand why anyone tagged it. BenoitRen 21:53, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Rykros mention
I'm not sure Rykros should be mentioned on the page. It's a huge Phantasy Star IV spoiler. There isn't even a spoiler tag. Sure, Wikipedia is a source of information, but that doesn't mean it has to spoil everything when it comes to creative works. This tendency irks me. BenoitRen 21:53, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Spinoffs
Phantasy Star Online and Phantasy Star Universe are clearly spin-offs within their own universe and timeline. So I don't think the article should claim that they're part of the main timeline. BenoitRen 21:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ps2 darkforce.gif
Image:Ps2 darkforce.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 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 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 23:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Algo1.gif
Image:Algo1.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 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) 04:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Rykros1.jpg
Image:Rykros1.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) 04:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Dezo1.jpg
Image:Dezo1.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 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) 21:37, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Palm1.jpg
Image:Palm1.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 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) 14:53, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Mota1.jpg
Image:Mota1.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 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) 15:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] PSU's planets removed
I removed the mentions of Phantasy Star Universe's planets from the listing of Algol's planets, as they don't belong there, since they're not the same planets.
If this page is to cover PSO's and PSU's universe in addition to the original Phantasy Star games', sections should be added for them. BenoitRen (talk) 23:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
