Talk:Retribution (StarCraft)

message: I really don't think this belongs in the footer box at the bottom of other Blizzard game articles - it's not even found on Blizzard's page. It's a third party lacklustre expansion, not unlike D!Zone and the like for Doom. I am going to cut it from those things along with Insurrection unless someone has a good reason they should stay. Deusfaux 23:31, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Regardless of whether they are part of the Blizzard footer, they are officially part of the StarCraft universe - as said in the Insurrection discussion page, they are given official recognition in the Battlenet FAQ. I've added this and Insurrection into a new "Games" part of the StarCraft universe footer, which (naturally) includes StarCraft, Brood War and Ghost. S@bre 17:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That means they are endorsed by Blizzard but still neither Retribution or Insurrection has been developed by Blizzard and thus has no place in the Blizzard footer. It can be included in the StarCraft footer. Also, even if Blizzard made these add-ons, the footer only lists the main games, no expansions or add-ons. --Fogeltje 21:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion in Blizzard Entertainment footer 

message: There any links or sources for this? I'm a pretty big Starcraft fan, and this is the first I've heard of this. Kuralyov 23:41, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think they can be bought anymore (perhaps not even eBay). You should be able to find them on the ed2k network. Tzarius 03:23, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do not suggest such things here.  Please remember that this is still copyrighted material.  Thank you. --- Randilyn 10:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links/sources 

message: so did blizzard make starcraft: retribution? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tzarious (talk • contribs) 23:23, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
:No. The article says so. Blizzard only authorized it. Please sign entries with four Tildes (~). Zirka 07:29, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blizzard? 

message: Has anyone been able to find any paperwork on this? I'm higly speculative that the game requires a Pentium III to run, even though a minimum of 16 MB of RAM and 50 MB of HDD space will do the trick. Further doubt is cast when the article mentions that the game engine isn't changed, and the expansion only adds campaign and multi-player maps. I plan to edit the article to reflect that. Zirka 07:29, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The system requirements are exactly the same as the original StarCraft, except that 50 megs of additional disk space is required.  This can probably be actively seen on the high resolution box shots over at MobyGames, although I haven't taken the time to check them myself. --- Randilyn 10:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

text: The system requirements box was ridiculously large. I've cut it down a bit S@bre 17:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

text: The above statement (sys reqs same as Starcraft) probably means the game can also be run on a Mac. Scott  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.207.151.85 (talk) 01:46, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sys Req's 

message: The name of the expansion pack is Retribution, not StarCraft: Retribution.  StarCraft: Retribution is only an informal name used by review sites, etc. when talking about the game.  Nowhere is it ever stated that the game uses Blizzard's StarCraft trademark in the name, except for the presense of the logo on the box shot, in which case it doesn't even appear before Retribution in the title, but rather afterwards, and as more of an addendum to the title.  Retribution (StarCraft) is probably more correct. --- Randilyn 10:55, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Furthermore, it would seem that the (formally) accepted full title for the game is Retribution: Authorized Add-On for StarCraft, which matches the box art exactly.  I've fixed the article to reflect this, but only in one occurence, as any more would be superfluous. --- Randilyn 12:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  StarCraft: Retribution 

message: All evidence (including the MobyGames page) seems to point to this actually being released in 1998, not 2001.  This makes since primarily because it does not use any of the Brood War content, which was either still under development at the time, or had just hit the shelves.  Further evidence is provided by the fact that the game was developed by Stardock back when they were still known as Stardock Systems, which was long before they became known as just Stardock (considering that there were other name change(s), such as Stardock.net, during that time).  I'm changing the release date until someone presents evidence that the game was in fact released in 2001. --- Randilyn 12:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release date 

message: I am a seasoned StarCraft modder (modification builder) for many years and I know for a fact that you cannot improve the StarCraft AI beyond the basic trigger abilities of StarEdit without a game data (MPQ) patch.  I also noticed on certain game review sites that people complained of missing music and cinematics.  These also require game data patches.  Is it possible that they were accidentally just playing the missions from the game using the Single Player Custom Game feature, and the CD actually came with a game data patch, or is this all hogwash?  If it is, then the improved AI claim needs to be removed, or, at the very least, cited. --- Randilyn 12:29, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improved AI? 

message: Are there any new units? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.247.235.10 (talk • contribs) February 26, 2007
:No. --M.A. 10:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Stuff

message: :Image:RetributionBox.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 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 19:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:RetributionBox.jpg