Talk:Deus Ex (video game)/Archive 3

message: A mediation cabal request was filed - the page with relevant discussion is here. My recommendation is to leave all links to any mods that have not profoundly effected the course of game development out of the main text. If it is a notable mod, an external link at the bottom of the page with a short explanation is sufficient. If you would like to comment on my resolution before it is finalized, do so now. — ßottesiηi (talk) 19:55, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like some clarification on what you would consider valid methods for determining whether or not a mod is "notable".  More info on the Mediation Case page. - Y|yukichigai 23:48, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Right, well, with the clarification I'd like to propose a... erm... proposal.  I do think the overview "flows" much better without the mod names in there, but I also think there are several relevant and/or important mods missing from the external mod links; (yes, Shifter included) I don't have a complete list yet, but off the top of my head some relevant "missing" mods include The Cassandra Project, Hotel Carone, Burden of 80 Proof, and Hardcore.  I will make a case for each, as well as my own mod, if asked.  There also, I think, is some merit to a small "Mods" section in the article, not necessarily mentioning any of the mods by name.  (There is plenty in the world of Deus Ex modding to talk about other than what mods came out) - Y|yukichigai 10:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mediation 

message: I'm going to change the paragraph in the Etymology section on JC's name. The current paragraph suggests that JC has nothing to do Jesus. It refrences Sheldon Pacotti(Deus Ex's writer) saying that the name was used for its unisex properties. However, after searching, I can't find one interview with the guy making any comment about JC's name. Furthermore, Harvey Smith, the lead designer of Deus Ex, says in one of the cited interviews, says:
"We were even going to mix in religion with the first game. A lot of people don't know this but J.C. Denton was supposed to be a descendant of Jesus Christ. We were going to pick up the old theory that Jesus had kids and that J.C. Denton had DNA from Jesus. When you mix those elements around you come up with these recurring patterns."
The new paragraph sticks to the facts and leaves speculation to the reader.
--Mitaphane 23:24, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perfectly fine, but I've added Pacotti's statement back in, because I've definitely read that somewhere before. I'll post the reference when I find it; it might be in a magazine. --Chrismith 03:22, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I couldn't find the Pacotti quote, but I did find an interview in which Warren Spector says essentially the same thing. I attributed this to Spector in the article and linked it to the interview. -- Chrismith 04:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the reference. I've modified the paragraph to better state that the origin of the name JC is speculative at best. --Mitaphane 03:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  JC standing for Jesus Christ 

message: The "Theme" section that was recently added was arguable, unimportant to the article, and could be considered original research (as it was marked), so I was bold and removed it. --Chrismith 16:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's ok... It wasn't that good anyway... --UVnet 07:56, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It did kind of stick out like a sore thumb, but I think some of the information mentioned in it might be worth noting elsewhere in the article.  Also, I can't find links to anything off the top of my head, but I could swear there were other reviews/articles/etc. which mentioned things similar to what was in the section, particularly the bit about Smuggler et al supporting a Jeffersonian interpretation of freedom.  Arrrggh... that's going to drive me nuts.  Y|yukichigai 04:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Theme" Section 

message: User Deuxhero has now twice added the fact that UNATCO troopers are heard to exclaim, "Jesus Christ, JC!" during battles to the section about Denton's name supposedly standing for "Jesus Christ." This does not belong in the article -- the phrase is just being used as a common exclamation; maybe it's just a regional thing, but people where I live (in the States) say it all the time. The troopers are not calling Denton "Jesus Christ." Even if this was an intentional reference by the developers (which I doubt) it has little significance and doesn't warrant inclusion in the article. --Chrismith 22:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless there can be shown evidence that this is intentional they're actually referring to him as Jesus Christ there is no reason to include this. --Crossmr 22:25, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree with Chrismith; the expression is common here in the US, and doesn't necessarily imply anything.  While it could be an intentional inclusion by the game devs there is no evidence at all which supports that.  It's a good bit of info if you're trying to make an argument about how JC is supposed to stand for Jesus Christ, interesting even, but for NPOV content like the article (is supposed to be) it's irrelevant. --Y|yukichigai 23:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Jesus Christ, JC" 

message: I'm seeing references to Paris and New York. Perhaps the article should include something on the plot and where it takes place. PeepP 21:58, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't remember. When was it removed? Feel free to start a new one.--Drat (Talk) 11:20, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Places 

message: I added a Citation tag to the recently-added comment about a reference to an album. I don't remember the scene in the game, and if that's all there is to it, there needs to be further evidence to support this. --70.142.40.34 11:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The scene is in the game, but I don't know if it's supposed to be a reference to anything. I agree that this needs a citation. --Chrismith 15:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: Can you all go look at the brand new article Robots in deus ex.  Does it merit a page (ie, is it notable)?  What categories does it belong in?  Is it original research or can references be added?  Can you wikilink it to appropriate articles?  Et cetera, et cetera....  GRBerry on New Page Patrol 17:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, at best it should be merged with List of enemies in Deus Ex. It needs to be edited for grammar, style, and factual accuracy. (I'm pretty sure Spider Bots have 4 or 6 legs.) --70.142.40.34 18:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I think this topic is notable enough. However, some statements might be just speculation: for instance, I doubt that it's at least assumed anywhere that small spider bots are used for repairs. They have 6 limbs, by the way. The article needs very serious corrections. CP/M 18:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Robots in deus ex]] 

message: The article Dragon's Tooth Sword (Deus Ex) should not be merged into Weapons in Deus Ex. Upon reading both articles, it seems that 'Weapons in deus ex' provides a factual report about each weapon: ammunition, statistics, characteristics etc. whereas 'Dragons Tooth Sword (Deus Ex)' provides information on the weapons relevance to the storyline of the game. There's no point merging the two articles; doing so would make for clumsy reading in the otherwise superb 'Weapons in Deus Ex' page.
:Quite possibly, though some people might doubt that at some point. The article might seem lacking references, at least some. CP/M 18:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 'dragons tooth sword' into 'weapons in deus ex?' 

message: Because I know this will come up, I do not per se have a problem with changing the current citation method from external HTML links to footnotes.  However, the Modding Links section (and perhaps other sections in the future) use the "ref" tags for footnotes, because as far as I can make out that's the only way to do footnotes here.  Because of the structure there is no way that I can discern to separate the references from the footnotes and still place the list of references at the end of the article.  If someone knows how to do this, or knows a less obstructive way to do footnotes, please let me know how and/or change the Modding Links section's footnotes so they use that method.  In the meantime please be careful when using the "ref" tag. -- Y|yukichigai 12:45, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References, citations and footnotes 

message: This game is the most interactive game that i have ever played. The gameplay of the game is amazing, their should be more games made that are interactive as Deus Ex. Anyone else agrees put your sigitare below this comment. --Marbus2 5 16:02, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As much as I agree, this isn't the place, and a bunch of signatures here isn't going to influence anything. Hopefully Bioshock and games like it will wake people up to the potentials of this kind of game.--Drat (Talk) 22:49, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''The most interactive game''' 

message: I noticed the switch from the original box image for Deus Ex to the newer Game of the Year edition image.  It's not like it has a huge impact on the article, but I do think the original box image is a little better suited towards being a representative image of the game, most games in general in fact.  If for nothing else, the new box art is "bright", which the actual game is not, and it's a bit cluttered with the repeated mention of the fact that it is the Game of the Year edition.  That may cross the lines from NPOV to personal taste, but that's just my impression.
Like I said, it's not significant really, just sort of a visual thing.  A product picture is a product picture.  However, if someone can find the original box art without the other various box decorations on it, e.g. publisher name, developer name, rating, etc., I would contend that it would be a better image for the game than any picture of the product, original or GOTY.
Anyway, just my opinion.  I don't really care much, the change just brought it to my attention and I thought it might be worth discussing. -- Y|yukichigai 21:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I didn't found a clean art, though, so I just put the old picture back. CP/M comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 10:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GOTY box image vs. original box image