Talk:Twisted Metal 4

message: Someone keeps posting this line of text in the development section:
"While the game received better comments compared to its prequel, and it also became a best-seller, it was still panned by the fans of the first two installments of the series. With the release of Twisted Metal: Head-On on the PSP, both this and its prequel Twisted Metal III were removed from the series' canon."
This does not belong in the development section of the page as it is an observation of critique and has nothing to do with the way in which the game was developed.  Furthermore, all of the information contained in this observation is already listed in the Reception section.
So whoever keeps posting this, please stop.  It is miscategorized and redundant.
TM4 was the best in the series when it came to gameplay, TM2 had a better story, and TM3 was the weakest in both.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.150.91.7 (talk) 09:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Reoccurring Problem in Development Section

message: In the first paragraph it says Twisted Metal 4 is an "improvement over the previous game". This seems like an opinion to me. The meaning of improvement should be given with a factual reason like critical reception or number of games sold.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leop85 (talk • contribs) 02:34, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutral?

message: I can't find any notable sources that support the claim that it's an integral part of the game other than background music. I can't find any sources indicating whether this soundtrack was released separately, either. Both of these things lead me to the conclusion that it's not notable. For example, the soundtracks of the Diablo series; a custom soundtrack, made entirely for the game, not just scrounged up tracks with a few exclusives, and in Diablo 2's case, it was released separately from the game itself as well, which helps its notability. There can be a number of reason why the main series article mentions the soundtrack, and it too has other problems, so that shouldn't be used to be claim precedent. Bottom line, I can't see how this is anymore than simple background music. Eik Corell (talk) 06:11, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: How is it important? What makes it stand out from other typical soundtracks? If it can be sourced, Rob Zombie's involvement can indeed be mentioned since he is a somewhat notable artist, but this doesn't justify listing every single track and superfluous details like when each specific track plays, or if the track has swearwords removed. If the soundtrack was notable enough, it would have its own article where some of this information might be relevant, but notability hasn't been established. When you say integral, I define that as something like the soundtrack of Left 4 Dead - The music is dynamically played depending on the players' predicament, and gives players about what is happening and what will happen, and as such it contributes to the atmosphere of the game -- That's integral. I don't see many reviews praising the soundtrack as anything but appropriate or just good. In fact I don't see many reviews at all, but that's slightly beside the point. I did indeed check the Gamespot review. I can't find any GameFAQ review on it, remember that we're dealing with reliable sources WP:RS, so what users have posted doesn't hold weight here. I can't really find any reviews other than Gamespot to be honest, and that one barely scratched the soundtrack of the game. Gamespot is, however, a reliable and notable source, so mentioning Rob Zombie's contributions using that as a source should be no problem. Eik Corell (talk) 01:51, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soundtrack