Talk:Soulcalibur IV
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Soulcalibur IV article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find video game sources: "Soulcalibur IV" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 3 days  |
 | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Soulcalibur IV. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Soulcalibur IV at the Reference desk. |
 |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Ashelotte?
[edit]A guest character for Soul Calibur IV on xbox 360 i unlocked her. Maybe someone could add her? Thanks --72.73.71.233 (talk) 19:59, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- She is mentioned, but she really isn't a character, she is just a clone of Astroth with a different costume. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 20:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Totally broken online play?
[edit]How come the reception section does not mention that the online play is totally broken and so laggy it's barely useable? The game will just pause multiple times per match. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.147.182.203 (talk) 01:43, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Got any reliable source?--Megaman en m (talk) 02:13, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
check the comments please, and also this is just one of many I found in 2 minutes. http://techsuki.net/2008/08/05/soul-calibur-4-online-mode-sucks/ Stevenalvarado (talk) 22:45, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
That is not a reliable source. Please read WP:RS.--Megaman en m (talk) 22:47, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
I have very little problem with lag. Once in a blue moon I'll get a laggy match, I have more problem with spammers, but thats to be said about any fighting game. DurinsBane87 (talk) 23:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Soulcalibur Broken Destiny merger
[edit]The game is separate but effectively...it's the same game with different modes and two new characters replacing the SW cast (one of which is just a guest character in itself). It'd do better as a subsection of this article.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 17:35, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
AGREE it is essentially the same game, so it should be merged, however as a subsection as their are a small amount of differences which should make it stand out just enough to be a sub-sectional, but not meriting its own article.--anonymous
Agree Look at this: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Mortal_Kombat:_Deception#Mortal_Kombat:_Unchained, but Tekken Dark Resurrection is not merged. As per MK: Unchained it was only on the PSP so it wouldn't be a very notable game, same case with Broken Destiny. The only reason T:DR has a separate page is because it had ports and is an extremely notable game. However, please, for the love of Wikpedia, don't do what you did to the Eddy Gordo and Ermac articles. You know, cut out most of the useful and obscure information? Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 02:30, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Disagree Having similar gameplay doesn't warrent a merger. This game is different enough, and has enough coverage to warrent its own article. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 21:11, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Agree per above. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 23:59, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Disagree If the SNK, Capcom, Mortal Kombat vs DC, and Marvel Vs Capcom type games all have their own articles, so should this one.--th33 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.153.131.57 (talk) 15:16, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Comment: To add onto my comment above. While merging, I believe the things you should keep are the referenced material and the image of the game's box. That said, the image has to abide by the fair-use rationale. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 23:54, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Disagree. What DBZROCKS said, it isn't the same game, nor a remake or port. It is a different game, albeit with similar gameplay etc. --Soetermans | drop me a line | what I'd do now? 19:14, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
Disagree. It isn't the same game. Its like merging Jak & Daxter: The Lost Frontier into Jak III. Its a completely separate game and should get its own article.KiasuKiasiMan (talk) 15:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Disagree. 1) Because of the fact they are different games with different features, merging them would make the article require a handful of "Except for on the ___" phrases--which is a pain to readers and editors alike. 2) As KiasuKiasiMan hinted, merging them together would mean that this should be done to all games of the same series, which is blasphemous. 3) When you consider the fact that titles such as Hamtaro have three separate pages of games for the same system, this article isn't even close to a waste of space in comparison. Yamzilla (talk) 18:00, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Disagree. As mine as well just merge the WHOLE SERIES together. Doesn't make any sense. They are TWO SEPERATE games. Not an expansion. I'm taking the tag down.--P dump (talk) 00:22, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Disagree I rescind my former statement, i'm pretty sure there's notability for a game that contains third party characters. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 00:33, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Soulcalibur IV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081216123855/http://www.namcobandaigames.com:80/games/soulcalibur4/features to http://www.namcobandaigames.com/games/soulcalibur4/features
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:15, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Character list added
[edit]Added a Character list to the top of the Characters section. Any questions please comment. Tsquiddy (talk) 08:14, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
1590 A.D. trilogy?
[edit]The pages for SoulCalibur II, SoulCalibur III and SoulCalibur IV all make mention of a "1590 A.D. trilogy." Other than the fact that the games are set within that year, is there any official source that actually makes mention of there being a "1590 A.D. trilogy?" I've checked "SoulCalibur: New Legends of Project Soul" and the Japanese SoulCalibur VI website, but I've come up with nothing. Doing a cursory search online only comes up with a fandom wikia page, but that's also unsourced. I tried doing a search in Japanese, but nothing comes up with there being a trilogy. The same user added the "1590 A.D. trilogy" term to all three pages. As far as I could tell, it seems like the term "1590 A.D. trilogy" is a made up fan-made term.
I'm relative new to editing Wikipedia, so I don't know if adding fan-made labels to Wikipedia pages is the norm or not. SneedfordStranger (talk) 06:34, 18 May 2024 (UTC)