Talk:Resistance: Fall of Man

message: The cloven should be added under the species list
What in the hell are Clovens anyway. Johnny542 20:39, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cloven

message: Read this inview that i found on gamespot. 
http://www.gamespot.com/pages/unions/read_article.php?topic_id=24679070&union_id=891
Sloud we edit it or not ? 
-Ratchetcomand 30 Augest 2006 02:34 (UTC)
:No.  Your article even says it's not official yet.  --HQ 00:29, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of things on the official site should be added.  The defeat of the Bolsheviks is definitely one of them.  Someone is going to have to rewrite the story and setting sections, because I can not word things well.  --HQ 01:41, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The game has been rated M

message: "the Hedgehog, much like it name implies, will float up and launch many spikes into anything around it."
This really made me laugh. Does the name hedgehog imply floating up and launching spikes? I've never seen a hedgehog do that! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by OAP boba (talk • contribs) .
:That's what I meant when I said I can't word things well.  --HQ 01:29, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Much.  --HQ 21:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hedgehog

message: I'll add the link to it.
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/745/745206p1.html Arctic-Editor 16:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Didn't check references. Someone made it before me. ;) Arctic-Editor 16:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  IGN Review is Up 

message: It seems to me that the section on the "Air Fuel Grenade" is a little confusing. I assume that it's some kind of thermobaric (or "fuel air" weapon) but I wanted to check before editing if "air fuel" has some other meaning that I don't know of. RWyn 18:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's definitely what it is.  Reword it as you see it necessary. --HQ 21:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I've added a link to Thermobaric weapon and added some stuff about the similarity to Halo's plasma grenade. I got my information from any third-party sources I could find using Google, so please change it back if I messed up. RWyn 00:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Air Fuel Grenade? 

message: I was looking through the article, and in some cases — most notably in the "Multiplayer" section — the future tense is used when talking about the game, even though it was a launch title (in other words, it was released on November 17, 2006 in the U.S.). An example: “Insomniac Games is currently planning to utilize the Playstation 3’s online service...” I figured we should change this to the present tense, because the game has already been released (something like “Insomniac Games utilizes the PlayStation 3’s online service...”). I figured this would be pretty uncontroversial, but I thought I’d ask anyway. —BrOnXbOmBr21 06:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yeah change the tense if you want. I wont because im too lazy. Dappled Sage 01:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Use of Future Tense

message: Well think about it in the game you only liberate England not Europe or Russia so maybe a couple more games to explain where the Chimera came from or where they get their tech (such as the metal towers and stalkers).Sam ov the blue sand 03:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resistance: Fall of Man 2 

message: The weapons section is rather text heavy and a lot of the information seems to be edging more on a game faq or walkthough as opposed to a WP article.  There should probably be some significant cutting of information here.--Masem 00:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All that info is in the game and so should be put in the article.Sam ov the blue sand 02:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just because it's in the game and fully verifiable from game sources, full weapon lists are strongly discouraged - that's information for a FAQ (See WP:NOT#IINFO).    Also see what is currently topic #7 in [] regardines "Lists of X/Y/Z...".  Same with the vehicle lists, particularly since there's only one vehicle the player can actually use.  The only list that should be on the page is the major characters/species.  The weapons section should be reduced down to something along the lines "The game features weapons both of human construction circa 1950, weapons created by the Chimera, and versions of Chimera weapons reverse-engineered by human forces." and then maybe a brief example or two (like the Auger).  Anything more on this and we're just describing material that should be in a game faq and becomes listcruft. --Masem 14:53, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Getting too FAQish... 

message: Anyone know why R:FoM is seemingly getting a lot of vandalism?  Is there some weird meme or the like that's encouraging people to do this?  Or just anti-PS3 people or others just being stupid? --Masem 23:54, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just revert and wait until someone can block him.Sam ov the blue sand 02:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The X-Ray stuff is right but you need to tell which missions they come from.Sam ov the blue sand 03:30, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the X-ray stuff is more because, unless you access the Morse code stuff, it's not apparent or official literature for the game, and thus up for debate and frequent changes.  I was talking more about the people that are added "THIS GAME SUCKS" type stuff. --Masem 04:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent spat of vandalism 

message: I was wondering if we could post a little critique subsection regarding any possible inaccuracies within the game's alternate history. For example, FDR was elected primarily because of the troubles of Great Depression, which did not occur in the Resistance timeline. Franck Drake 14:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an alternate history.  Things that didn't happen in real life are to be expected.  --HQ 02:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Um...it's a game...--Eloc 08:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Inaccuracy... 

message: Section was blanked. Couldn't figure out who did it. Should we restore it? -NordsternMN 20:33, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sequel

message: The article states that this game was released in the US on November 14, 2006. However, the PS3 didn't come out until Nov. 17. Is the release date in error?J.delanoy 00:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it isn't.  A few PS3 games were indeed released on the 14th, Resistance being one of them.  --HQ 00:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Date Inaccuracy?

message: Some PS3 hating, xbox loving vandal said this game was a poor man gears of war, so I removed it.
:If it is a poor man's Gears of War than why is the PS3 $600 and the 360 is either $400 or $480 so I guess you could say that Gears of War is a poor mans Resistance. I'm just commenting, I found that funny.Sam ov the blue sand 14:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But you still don't put that in the article. Machine758 18:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: PS3 Haters Comment

message: Shouldn't the story section have a spoiler warning? Perhaps somewhere before it is revealed what the British 'secret weapon' is, and at least before the ending scene is described? (I've taken the liberty of tagging the 'plot synopsis' section btw) --Lemi4 13:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Based the new policy on spoilers per WP:SPOILER, sections marked "Plot" or "Story" carry an implicit spoiler tag.  Thus, spoiler warnings are redundant.  (There probably was a spoiler warning there a while ago, but there's a huge effort to remove unneeded spoiler tags.) --Masem 14:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: One has popped up again, killing it with fire. WP:SPOILER clearly states that a section called "Plot" or "Story" needs no spoiler tag. Please do not add it again. Goldfritter 11:44, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler warning? 

message: I found this amusing; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/6736809.stm might be worth noting. --Caiman 13:39, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Church of England controversy

message: I've added Sony's statements on the matter. Can the neutrality dispute tag be removed now? --GracieLizzie 17:50, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say it is ; most of the section is direct quotes from both sides so there's no WP editor bias in it.  I'm sure there'll be more Monday too. --Masem 18:18, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  CoE section neutrality  

message: If anyone who has the game could provide a screenshot of the battle in the Cathedral that would be helpful for the article. Perferrably not only would it have some easily identifible Church image, such as stained glass or a cross or something, but it really should also contain a pic of whichever alien beasty that your doing battle with in there.
I've heard a couple interviews with the Dean of the Cathedral and no one as of yet has asked him if he's saying that the Church would side with flesh eating aliens if it suddenly found itself transported to this fictional reality. Is he suggesting Jesus loves Slipskulls and Greyjacks? I don't have a PS3 but I'm tired of videogame haters going off without even looking at the product. So someone please post a pic of you battling a fanged nightmare inside the Cathedral.
:--Wowaconia 04:34, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Screen shot of Cathedral scene would be helpful

message: Use this source for whatever you like.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PPE8KG0&show_article=1
1. It claims that Sony has apologized for the Cathedral scandral, and other info
2. The article claims that Resistance has sold more than 2 million units worldwide. 
I'm putting the source up for grabs. Use it for what you want.
7FlushSetzer 01:10, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the Jan. 17, 2008 Insomniac podcast, they mention that the game has sold over 2 Million copies while interviewing a Bungie rep.  Evilkeen (talk) 23:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Game sales topple 2 million? 

message: The rating section lists PEGI's rating as 18+, however I could've sworn at one point that Playstation Network listed it as 16+. Has the rating been raised recently?
Also, should we list that the BBFC has a 15 on the game box? 82.41.128.207 22:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rating for UK? 

message: Is it 2 player co-op or 4 player co-op.Sam ov the blue sand 00:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you now I see there's no point in buying another 2 controllers.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 22:18, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

text: It's 2-player co-op, 4-player offline multiplayer. Scarslasher (talk) 01:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Co-op 

message: Generally, game article plots (particularly for FPS as opposed to RPGs) should not be excessive.  The alternate history stuff was good, but for an encyclopedia article about the game, it borders on being too much, yet the fact that much of it can be wikilinked in sorta makes me think that it may make for a good secondary article "Alternate History of the Resistance series" (presuming that more will be learned in R2).  So I've "cut" out most of it (the original stuff is there in html comment) and reduced that down to "ok, russia shuts down, no WWII, and then suddenly, there's the chimera" which is the most basic stuff needed to understand the alternate history as it pertains to the game itself. --Masem 17:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note on alternative history stuff 

message: I think mention should be made of the fact that most mainstream British news sources claim that gang(?) shootouts take place within the cathedral, despite no such events taking place in-game.
I don't think it deserves input into the article, but maybe the subject matter of the game was inapropriate. Who knows? Machine758 17:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Media bias

message: This info is usually put into the infobox at the top right, but in this case, I don't believe this is a licensed engine or the like (similar to Unreal 3 or Havok) so there's no information about it. --Masem 20:23, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a very heavily modified Ratchet & Clank/Jak & Daxter engine. Machine758 18:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Game Engine?

message: Is the dispute with the Church of England still going on?  I'm asking this because I haven't seen anything of it in the news and hte section hasn't changed in a while.  If the event has ended, the template should be removed. Looneyman 14:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Current event template

message: Whats the source for this? No source is given in the article and there is nothing mentioned on the Michael Bay article... sounds like a hopeful fan's dream, TBH. Bohrok Awakener 13:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resistance film 

message: Is there a way to turn off the cursing without the mute button ? If I were to turn of the blood on the game menu would this also turn of the language. Answer ASAP.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.37.146 (talk) 22:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh there is no way to turn off the cursing, sorry.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 21:50, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

text: shit, screw, crap, damn, and a couple of times, fuck.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 00:17, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please answer ASAP 

message: when you kill somone, do the bodies dissapear or stay there?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.37.146 (talk) 20:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that the body will stay where it is...  But I'm not 100% sure.  Dan 00:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If the bodies disappear, they will at least remain visible for a ridiculously long time.  --HQ 00:42, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead Bodies

message: Given this game is disc-based, how will it be updated with rumble?  Will there be a new file on the hard drive that will recognise when the game is loaded and run alongside?  86.17.211.191 00:27, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rumble 

message: Exactly how much has been confirmed about this sequel byond that it will happen?  --HQ 19:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sequel 

message: Shouldn't we add that, I mean it seems notable enough, we would have several 3rd and 2ndary sources.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 03:01, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gamespot tournament 

message: I replaced the template that was used for the review ratings with what I found to be a more recent template.  This fixed the quote from the Church controversy was misplaced.  I also incorporated the awards won by this game into that template and removed that list from the text body.  I think it looks better.  Hopefully others agree. will381796 (talk) 17:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awards & Reviews infobox 

message: On Sony's official Resistance website (), there is a map/timeline detailing the fictional history of the game. However, there are two red points on the map which are marked as "locked" events (located in Alaska and California). I know this isn't a discussion forum for discussing the game, but I'm wondering if anyone know how to access these two locked events? It seems like it wants some sort of password... I'm asking because I'm currently construcing a Resistance Wikia that could benefit greatly from this information. Thanks. --Bohrok Awakener (talk) 17:47, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Locked sections at us.playstation.com/resistance 

message: A part of the article, labeled Guinness, is not only a small section which in my opinion is unworthy of a titlehead, but is also inappropriately placed.  This needs to be moved from the "story" section to the "critical reception" section.  However my attempts to move it were immediately reversed.  In order to avoid an editing war, what is everyone's thoughts on the subject?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rucha58 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I was trying to remove it, not move it to a new location. Sorry about that. But, anyway, I removed it because it's un-sourced and sounds pretty fake to me. If you find a reference for it, I'd put it in the intro paragraph.--Koji†Dude (C) 02:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guinness 

message: Will It Come Out On Other Systems?Peace out (talk) 19:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Systems 

message: Just some comments before you get a GA review.
*The reception section is way short, especially considering the number of reviews in the reviewbox. Incidentally, all those need references (in said reviewbox).
*No development information?
*References need formatting - publishers, access dates.
*Ref 3 and 4 - are either of those sources reliable?
giggy (:O) 09:39, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions 

message: Could the end of Resistance be possibly based of the end of the movie Platoon? --Seb0910 (talk) 01:38, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Platoon reference? 

message: The main game's article is still fairly short and there is easily space for an explanation of the controversy. Most of the controversy article restates things that are already in the game's article. The church's case was ultimately completely groundless, did not affect game sales, and in fact assisted the church in raising tourism money, so it was a nothingburger.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:30, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose. Besides size, nothing of what you're arguing is really an argument for merging. For example, No Russian - the controversy is largely caused by an abundance of misinformation, ie groundless. Hot Coffee incident was also groundless, and yet that was a huge controversy about the best-selling GTA at the time. The No Russian controversy also didn't hurt sales. The reception also has the developer acknowledge the controversy, and has Sony declaring that the series would not have cathedrals in future entries. It also resulted in the Church of England creating new guidelines on how their holy grounds could be depicted in media. The fact that the controversy was a boon for the cathedral is also not relevant to notability - it seems like you have beef with the cathedral for making a stink about this! These arguments you're making don't appear to be guided on any guidelines or policies, as they don't have anything to do with what determines notability. Now, as far as the main article goes, the main article isn't short because it lacks a robust controversy section, it's short because the article is overall undeveloped, which would not really be fixed by it being merged back into it. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 12:17, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: What really amazes me about the article is that it doesn't even show Manchester Cathedral was used ingame. The comparison image looks nothing alike, and was solely a matter of coincidence. While Sony pledged not to use that specific cathedral in future games, they never admitted to actually using it in the game, saying it was a generic cathedral. If one were not being generous, they could call it a work of pure misinformation. Such an article needs drastic paring down to reduce it to the sole facts of the situation - people confused it for a certain church, and Sony apologized to make them feel better.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:27, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: What you're proposing is using your own personal original research. I suggest you familiarize yourself WP:OR. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 12:32, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not conducting original research, I can quote the article on this. On 15 June 2007, Sony issued the following statement: "We do not accept that there is any connection between contemporary issues of 21st century Manchester and a work of science fiction in which a fictitious 1950s Britain is under attack by aliens. It is not our intention to cause offence by using a representation of Manchester Cathedral in chapter eight of the work. If we have done so we sincerely apologise." Emphasis on "if". They did not admit to using Manchester Cathedral at all, so the entire foundation of the article is faulty - based entirely on a coincidental occurrence or rumor.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:36, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: An involved party disputing the claims against it is not sufficient to demonstrate that the claim is untrue. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 12:38, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

text: ...Actually re-reading that, Zx, what the heck? They literally said that they used a representation of Manchester Cathedral in the quote you posted. The "if" is clearly referring to "causing offense." - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 12:45, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, ultimately, the statement is very vague in how it can be interpreted. It can be seen as saying "we did not mean to cause offense", or "we did not mean to cause offense, or include a hypothetical representation of the cathedral". For the most part, the  sources state the resemblance was "alleged", without a single source actually outright stating the two looked the same.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:48, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

text: I meant that if you remove the restatements about the game, as well as the back and forth "he said, she said" that characterizes the rest of the article and focus on the facts, there would be very little left. In any case, I think it's clear we both have our views about it that will never  change, so it's probably pointless to continue debating in this way. I will wait to see what others believe about whether it is undue.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:01, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I mean, stating "it's mostly restatements of the article" doesn't really infer "as long as you remove content that got significant coverage in mainstream and gaming press." - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 15:54, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

text: I also just expanded the main game's article section to a size I believe isn't undue. I think it shows it can be merged into a far smaller section while communicating largely the same information.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:19, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of [[Controversy over the use of Manchester Cathedral in Resistance: Fall of Man]] into [[Resistance: Fall of Man#Manchester Cathedral controversy]] 

message: The redirect Resistance: Jinrui Botsuraku no Hi has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  ArcticSeeress (talk) 16:29, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Resistance: Jinrui Botsuraku no Hi]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]