Talk:Jumping Flash!
Jumping Flash! is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 30, 2016. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
First real 3d platformer?
[edit]I think it should be mentioned in the article that this was a pretty unique title in that it was a true 3D platform game (very rare in 1995 - unique?) and more importantly, a first-person platform game. I would add something about it myself but I'm not SURE it is the only first-person 3D platform game (ignoring the sequels!). In any case, it was very different to other platformers from the same time (such as Rayman).
http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Alpha_Waves_/_Continuum_%28computer_game%29 Alpha Waves is by many claimed to be the first 3d platformgame, and more importantly it seems the basic gameplay of Jumping Flash was inspired by it. Also games such as Ataris I, Robot and Sentinel on the C64, could be considered platformgames without stretching the definition too much I think. Is everybody OK with me changing the text for Jumping Flash to mention Alpha Waves as a possible candidate to the title as first 3d platformgame? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Frisenette (talk • contribs) 16:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC).
REPLY
Sure, I didn't know about that Alpha Waves game. It's probably still worth noting 'one of the first...' or 'the first on a major console'? It might be worth mentioning (and linking) games like I, Robot and Sentinel in passing as early 3D games but they aren't really the same type of game.
- Sentinel and I Robot are irrelevant. You can't have a platformer where you can't jump and fall. I, Robot sort of has a jump, but it's completely automated and you can't fall. Geograph Seal should be mentioned, though, since JF! is basically a spiritual sequel.Frogacuda 01:01, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Crater Planet vs. Earth
[edit]I kept seeing the name of the planet as "Crater Planet" not just here but in multiple reviews. Is that was its called in the PAL version? The instruction manual for the US version calls it Earth, and I'm going to go ahead and change the article to that effect until I got a response; perhaps both names are valid. ~ Hibana 00:10, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Jumping Flash!/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: GamerPro64 (talk · contribs) 20:05, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
I will reviewing this article soon. GamerPro64 20:05, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Now for the review proper. I believe that in its current state, this article is not up to GA standards. One issue I have is the reliability on some of the sources used. I have never heard of "Qj.net", "The Next Level", and "AltPop.com" so I'm not entirely sure if they are reliable or not. As well, there are dead links all over the page.
- I'll remove those references and find some more reliable ones. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 13:41, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
- I've removed the Qj.net reference as it's not reliable, but 'AltPop' shows every track of the Jumping Flash soundtrack and is the only reference to show the soundtrack. I've kept that one. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:42, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
My other issue with the article, and probably the biggest issue I have, is the article failing 3.a in the criteria. The "Development" section is only two paragraphs long, with five sentences all together. This game was a Playstation launch title and an early example of 3D platforming and yet all that is talked about is its soundtrack and how it was under the title of "Spring Man" at one point. There has to be more to its development than what is presented.
- I have spent nearly an hour trying to find more details on the development but the information is extremely scarce. I'll keep looking and once I have found enough information I'll put it into the article. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 13:41, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
- Please believe me when I say this, but I have found virtually nothing on its development. The closest relation I could find was that Jumping Flash was carried over from the developer's previous game, Geograph Seal... ☠ Jaguar ☠ 15:07, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
- Here's what I suggest. Maybe ask members of the Video Game project or go to WT:VG for some assistence in finding more about its development. GamerPro64 15:45, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
I will give this review 7 days and if all issues are not addressed by then, I will fail it. GamerPro64 20:18, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- I did not find much on it's development. Jaguar is mostly right. I still found this review. But if it's content is added, you probably will regard it as an unreliable source. Should it be added? What do you think? I am happy to help :) Thanks, Shane Cyrus (talk) 08:35, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
- @GamerPro64:, I've asked WT:VG for some information on its development but other than Geograph Seal me and Shane can't find anything on its early beta. I'll keep trying, but just letting you know that we haven't found anything to back up its claims yet. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 13:39, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
- @Shane Cyrus: According to the Sources page, Joystiq is considered to be a situational source. Text next to it says that "it is best to demonstrate the reliability of the individual authors sourced" so maybe check to see if the author of the article is themselves reliable. GamerPro64 02:24, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
- @GamerPro64:, I've asked WT:VG for some information on its development but other than Geograph Seal me and Shane can't find anything on its early beta. I'll keep trying, but just letting you know that we haven't found anything to back up its claims yet. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 13:39, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
I only found the author's twitter. Shane Cyrus (talk) 07:13, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Please suggest any improvements to be made. The close date is coming closer and I don't want this article to fail. Please - Shane Cyrus (talk) 17:21, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
- Really neither do I. I've asked WT:VG for information on the early development and hopefully that information will come to me in time before this closes. As soon as I get it I'll put it into the article. There's nothing else I can do now but wait. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:44, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
- If I may comment, failing because a source-related decision hasn't been made despite ongoing work to fix problems seems harsh. I think the seven-day rule is intended to make sure work is being done. Tezero (talk) 18:02, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
@GamerPro64:, I have expanded the development section with all the information I could gather thanks to the help from a few members of WP:VG. I have also attended to your comments regarding the references, if need be I can add more as Thibbs has very kindly given me some reliable sources from 1995. Do you think Jumping Flash meets the criteria now? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 15:07, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
- I'm just gonna chuck the seven day expiration out for this review as I'm calling for a Second Opinion on this article. Somethings bothering me with the "Plot" and "Gameplay" sections but I can't put my finger on it. Would also be good to get someone else's take on the article as a whole. Until then, with the expansion of information in the "Development" section, it would be beneficial to add some of it in the lead. GamerPro64 00:56, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
- I don't notice this in Gameplay, but Plot has a thin musk of a game's back cover or some other first-party material. Tezero (talk) 01:04, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
- Re: second opinion, per my comments at WT:VG#Jumping_Flash.21_development, the article has completeness concerns for not using the print sources of the era, which will undoubtably say more about the game's reception and development, which is sparse as is czar ♔ 03:16, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
I didn't see what was wrong with the plot and gameplay sections, but I done a small copy edit on them anyway. Is there a verdict yet? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:13, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- My second opinion was that the sections were sparse and could use content from the print (main) sources czar ♔ 18:04, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
@GamerPro64: I've expanded the lead, copy edited the plot, gameplay and development sections and have generally polished most parts of the article. If there are any more concerns I can tackle them? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:17, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
- I'm trying to figure out if the article meets all the points in the criteria and I believe it meets all but one thing. I mentioned earlier that I questioned the reliability of "The Next Level" and it's still in the article and we've haven't confirmed how reliable it is. Also I want to point out that the 1UP.com, Gamespy, and Gaming-Age references are dead. Has nothing to do with the criteria but would be beneficial to get archive links to them. GamerPro64 02:31, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
- Additionally, I also have a suspicious that "Drakukls" is also unreliable. GamerPro64 02:38, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
- TheNextLevel turned out to be one huge blog, I wasn't sure if it was reliable so I removed it anyway and replaced it with three more reliable ones. I've also replaced all the dead links with multiple newer ones. As for Drakulus, I thought it wasn't reliable so I've placed them too. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 10:19, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
- I checked the sources you added and removed some of them. GameFAQs is unreliable while the Giant Bomb link, while the site is deemed situational, was a wiki which isn't allowed. I'm not sure about the IGN link exactly. Gonna need a second opinion on that. GamerPro64 12:19, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
- TheNextLevel turned out to be one huge blog, I wasn't sure if it was reliable so I removed it anyway and replaced it with three more reliable ones. I've also replaced all the dead links with multiple newer ones. As for Drakulus, I thought it wasn't reliable so I've placed them too. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 10:19, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
- Additionally, I also have a suspicious that "Drakukls" is also unreliable. GamerPro64 02:38, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
- Second opinion here. These IGN pages are generally accepted to be non-editor vetted as community wiki pages or autocompiled from who knows where. Also this 1up page is user-submitted. Both should be removed. Again, print sources are likely where the info's at on these games. czar ♔ 15:24, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
- I didn't know Giant Bomb was unreliable. I thought IGN was reliable as the sources I chosen were from actual critics. I'll implement the remaining print sources I have into the article. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:01, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
- I've replaced every source you mentioned with the last print sources I have. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:31, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
- IGN's generally fine—it's just those wiki pages (like the one I linked above) are user-generated and not vetted czar ♔ 21:45, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
- I've replaced every source you mentioned with the last print sources I have. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:31, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
- I didn't know Giant Bomb was unreliable. I thought IGN was reliable as the sources I chosen were from actual critics. I'll implement the remaining print sources I have into the article. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:01, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
- Second opinion here. These IGN pages are generally accepted to be non-editor vetted as community wiki pages or autocompiled from who knows where. Also this 1up page is user-submitted. Both should be removed. Again, print sources are likely where the info's at on these games. czar ♔ 15:24, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Everything is done I think, I've replaced every reference you mentioned with the print sources. Is there a verdict yet? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 16:21, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
- All right. After much deliberation, I believe that this article meets all requirements for Good Article status and will close this review as Passing. If anyone objects to this decision, they can take the article to Good Article reassessment. GamerPro64 23:42, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Recent mention
[edit]@Jaguar, thought you'd be interested in this recent mention: http://www.polygon.com/2014/6/8/5791256/e3-sequels-that-should-happen czar ♔ 00:11, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
- Oh wow, that would be great! Jumping Flash was one of the most overlooked and underrated games in history, it would be amazing if something like this concept would be recreated for the next gen consoles given all of the advances made in the last eighteen years. I hope something like this happens, it brings back so many childhood memories! ☠ JAGUAR ☠ 22:59, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
- Another recent and very interesting mention of Jumping Flash was recently discussed in a podcast with ex vice-president of third-party development Bill Rehbock of Atari Corp. and he stated something very interesting at the 43:13 mark. Here: https://theretrohour.com/atari-jaguar-bill-rehbock-ep139/ Do The Math (talk) 16:25, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Ultra Co rename to Muu Muu Co
[edit]According to the only source I could find on this, [1] ("Fahs, Travis (4 November 2008). "Jumping Flashback". IGN. IGN UK. Retrieved 1 November 2014."), it appears that the character designs in Jumping Flash! were done by the Japanese studio Ultra Co., Ltd, who renamed themselves to Muu Muu Co., Ltd following the release of the game, after the name of the MuuMuu creatures that feature in it. The article states that "The character designs in Jumping Flash! were done by the Japanese studio Ultra Co., Ltd, who were formerly known as Muu Muu Co., Ltd, which inspires the name of the MuuMuu creatures that features in all three games of the series." which appears to be the complete opposite of what actually happened. Techtri (talk) 20:14, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
- I've now changed the article to match this source. Techtri (talk) 16:45, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Gameplay
[edit]The article states that there are five worlds of three levels each for a total of 18 levels - which has my maths sense tingling! I'm sure this is probably an issue of clarity rather than inaccuracy but not knowing the game myself does someone want to rectify this? Dutpar (talk) 07:14, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Jumping Flash!. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110522211947/http://www.1up.com/features/forgotten-gem-jumping-flash to http://www.1up.com/features/forgotten-gem-jumping-flash
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140612053335/http://www.1up.com/features/leaps-bounds-history-jump to http://www.1up.com/features/leaps-bounds-history-jump
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151011233850/http://www.1up.com/features/forgotten-gem-jumping-flash to http://www.1up.com/features/forgotten-gem-jumping-flash
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:30, 23 September 2017 (UTC)