Talk:The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind/Archive 3

message: The article states "On the opposite extreme, the open design of the game permits one to complete it in under fifteen minutes," with  as its source.  This is very misleading - many games have exploits that allows such speed runs to be made; it has little to do with Morrowind's "open design."  I think this should just be removed.  Many games can be similarly sped through, and unless the speed run is notable somehow, I see no need to mention it, especially like this. -Elmer Clark (talk) 01:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So does Morrowind (the whole main quest at least).  However, you can get around it (like this guy does) with exploits.  Lots of games can be sped through with exploits.  It's just a dumb speed run; similar tricks are out there for dozens of games.  You cannot "complete the game in under fifteen minutes" due to the "open design of the game."  It's just due to a certain combination of exploits.  That's just plain false. -Elmer Clark (talk) 12:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

text: So are there no objections to removing this then? -Elmer Clark (talk) 20:36, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Speed run...

message: Under the Rationale for fair use in the Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind Article, a bullet point reads:
"The image is used to demonstrate the game's distinctive third person combat,"
Shouldn't this be "First person" instead of "third person?" The rationale under it for the image's use in articles regarding Gameplay of the Elder Scrolls series uses "First person" correctly, but the first rationale does not. Was just something I noticed. Corbenine (talk) 05:31, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect rationale statement for the Morrowind-Combat.png image?

message: This Featured Article has five dead external links, which can be found here. Please fix them as soon as possible. Thanks! --haha169 (talk) 23:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: These seem to have been addressed now. — Dispenser 00:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: WP:VG External Links check

message: Should this compilation be mentioned in the article?:  --Mika1h (talk) 12:45, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be difficult. As the link states, there are no reviews, no previews, and no press coverage of the package. Is there anything to satisfy the requirements of WP:V? Geuiwogbil (Talk) 14:56, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duopack 

message: correct me if i'm wrong, but that tracklisting is not correct, the directsong release has the correct titles as it published the soundtrack directly from jeremy soule, should the tracklisting be changed?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by WichitaQ (talk • contribs) 15:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's wrong, go for it- please put a reference to where you're getting the track titles from, though.  If you don't know how, just leave a link to where the information was from here on the talk page and I or someone else will fix it up. --PresN 16:19, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  soundtrack track listing 

message: This page says that you can awaken and have killed a mission critical NPC, which is untrue, you have complete control in werewolf form  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.56.236.238 (talk) 08:30, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have excised the infected area. Geuiwogbil (Talk) 12:37, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Werewolf control 

message: Is the game backward compatible (e.g. will it run on Xbox 360) and if so (or if not) should this be noted in the article?  Since the Xbox is no longer sold, it is important, I think, to note whether this is one of the games which will run on the new Xbox. NathanJ1979 (talk) 22:48, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, it is, with minor graphical glitches.  Easier than I thought to find the List of Xbox games compatible with Xbox 360.  Whether or not to mention that in the article I'll leave up to y'all. NathanJ1979 (talk) 22:59, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Backward Compatibility

message: Significance:
Not just a mod.
A DLL wrapping utility that actively enhances Morrowind with the latest graphics shaders, HDR, anti-alliasing, Antiscoperic, LOD distant terrain, and other enhancements from newer versions of direct X. Higher end GPU's can use this to render Morrowind in a state that rivals if not supersedes 'Oblivion' graphically. 
Continued development as of 25th May 2010 and beyond.
The Penultimate 'base mod' for Morrowind. Its PC market permeation is presumable quite large. 
The inclusion of Morrowind Script Extender, also of significance, means that many mods are dependent.
You don't earnestly play Morrowind in 2010 without Morrowind Graphics Extender.
This information is important. Those who mull purchasing Morrowind should know this,
This sort of utility is UNIQUE in my experience. Can someone tell me if long-lasting classics like Starcraft have DLL-wrapping utilities to add modern Shaders etc to them? (I need to find these utilities if they exist heh heh)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.235.186.51 (talk) 22:43, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool as that is (and it is, I'm totally downloading it the next time I replay the game) it's still not a big enough deal to call out by name- it should be noted that there are mods that improve the graphics of the game, but just like we don't call out every gameplay-enhancing mod or tc specifically we shouldn't call out graphics-enhancing mods. Still, I've modified the article to point out that there are mods that make the graphics better, not just different like it previously did. --PresN 02:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed Edit: Morrowind Graphics Extender

message: On this page, there is no mention of the Collector's Edition. I find this strange, considering the high promotion it got, how extremely collectable some of the items included were, the fact that it sold-out almost immediately and how extremely rare it is nowadays. I presume there is a reason that it's not included, what is that? Even if it's not that notable, at least mention it!--The Rogue Leader 06:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Dirt is extremely collectible. Perhaps you mean to say sought after?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.235.186.51 (talk) 23:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason, most likely, is that noone added it. Do you have reliable sources? —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 23:28, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If someone wants to add it, I can make a photo of the collectors edition (+what's inside) to place beside the text? Orian90  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Orian90 (talk • contribs) 08:47, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: COLLECTOR'S EDITION

message: Was it this game or IV that kept giving people BSOD. I thought it was this one for some reason. I guess bugs are not notable JasonHockeyGuy (talk) 07:50, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Bugs are only notable if they receive extensive media coverage and affect the game's reception. If you find articles demonstrating it, you could leave links on this talk page and we'll put them in the article, or you could do it yourself so long as the references are properly formatted. Nomader (Talk) 15:41, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  criticism because of game bugs? 

message: While digging through the online print archive, I located the following print preview material for this game:
*Computer Games Magazine Feature
*PC Gamer UK Preview
*Computer Games Magazine Preview
*Computer Gaming World Feature
One or more print reviews for this game may also be found in the archive. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 16:20, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference material