Talk:Mega Man 2/Archive 1

Gameplay Section

I added something to the gameplay section to remove the "stub" status. It's not much, but at least it's something. It could probably do with some polishing. Megawolf 16:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Megawolf

I've moved the trivia items that were actually explaining gameplay into the gameplay section. The section still needs a lot of work. We'll need some references and a serious copyedit. We also want to make sure the section does not turn into a walkthrough. Jay32183 22:43, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I completely rewrote the gameplay section. What do people think? Jay32183 01:39, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I added again the masters' weaknesses to the 'Robot Masters' subsection. I'm not quite sure as to why these were deleted just a few days ago, and I'd like to see some rationale next time around if and when someone chooses to do so again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.187.51.179 (talk) 01:52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

More info about the music please

The article tells us that "The music from Mega Man 2 is considered to be one of the best soundtracks in video game history.", but still that's about as much as we are told about the music. I'd like to see more information about it, like track names, composers, descriptions of the sound of the tracks... Things like that. Thanks.

And by the way; who considers it one of the best soundtracks? I agree that it's good, but citing a source would be nice. - x-Flare-x 06:03, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

There is a general consensus among fans of the game and musicians that Mega Man 2 has one of the best video game soundtracks ever, particularly of 8-bits. Since you can't really source that without a poll etc. at the moment I would say look at the attention the game's soundtrack has received: Nevada City, CA's The Advantage is known to cover several songs including Flashman and Dr. Wily's themes. The Minibosses have covered several different themes over several different releases. A group from Athens, GA by the name of Mega Band (which features several members from Cinemechanica have done perhaps the most unique thing with the music, they play the soundtrack to the game in real time as a person plays the game all the way through with it projected onto a screen behind the band (video footage: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7343353144229288438&q=hhbtm&total=35&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=9

Cyclopseslayer 06:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I noticed you guys removed mention of how popular this game's music is. I suggest you KEEP this statement in, and somebody find a source, instead of removing it constantly. In fact, if you don't think it's popular, find a source that claims it isn't. I dare you. Nutmilk 03:39, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

There could just be a section about the frequency of megaman covers as stated. That way you wont have to prove the statement that it is well loved, just show that the songs from it are frequently used, thus proving your point. 140.232.146.190 21:43, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

The Megas (band) covers music from Mega Man 2 specifically. alby13 (talk) 14:39, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Even though that's vitally important info about the band, it's trivial info about the game. Jay32183 (talk) 23:47, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. It is representative of the impact and legacy the game has. Capcom has mentioned them on its official blog, so that satisfies the notability requirement. Just a thought. Lumaga (talk) 17:39, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Except that a blog is not a reliable source. It's also original research to claim that the band is significant to the game, even though it is properly documented that the game is significant to the band. Jay32183 (talk) 23:22, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Assuming the blog is run by capcom, I'd consider that perfectly reasonable to be used as a source. Compare Sergey Brin on Google's dev blog: we would consider that a reliable source on some google project. Protonk (talk) 23:31, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Capcom-Unity.com is company run according to IGN.com. I agree that it is reasonable to be used as a source. Originally I was responding to the mention of demonstrating how popular Mega Man 2's music is by listing a cover band. This all started by wanting to add more about the music than what the article currently states. Hopefully this effort aids in improving the article. alby13 (talk) 10:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Misleading music information

The music paragraph says : "One of the pieces of music from Mega Man 2 has become a staple of the games. The theme played when a Robot Master is selected has been reused in later games." That theme did not originate in Mega Man 2 at all, it was already present in the first game, so either we delete this sentence, or move it to the MM1 article. --Dez26 18:23, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

The whole US box art is misleading, since the creators of that... Horrific image are not the same as the designers. Not only that, but because it's made by people who have NOTHING to do with the development of the game whatsoever. So I can safely say this one is quite non-canon too. I mean, the arm-cannon alone is a huge trademark. Megaman isn't a 30-year old guy, he's a boy robot! this guy looks more like a secret agent in his carnival outfit. Someone PLEASE change it. --Ewoud van Loon, 14:58, 7 Januari 2007 (GMT+1)

Automated suggestions

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• Generally, trivia sections are looked down upon; please either remove the trivia section or incorporate any important facts into the rest of the article.^[?]
• There are a few sections that are too short and that should be either expanded or merged.
• Please provide citations for all of the {{fact}}s.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Jay32183 00:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Story

What does "along with eight (six in the original)" mean? That the story told in megaman 2 says that there were 8 "evil" robot in megaman 1? I think it means 6 robots that eventually went evil, plus 1 rock and 1 roll = 8 robots. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.246.136.210 (talk • contribs) 11:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Difficult only in Anniversary collection

Fixed the part about difficult being the only available option in the Anniversary series. Easy mode can be selected in the gameplay options screen. Badass McGreat 15:38, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Bubble Lead

In english, is it pronounced "bubble leed" (as in reed), or "bubble lead" (as in read)? Thanks! Also, octopuses 17:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

"Leed". As in, the bubbles lead you to the top of the screen.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 18:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick reply! Also, octopuses 18:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

are you sure? I always thought it was lead, as in the zeppelin, due to the fact that they are effected by gravity, and fall streat down when they have no support under them. 140.232.146.190 21:47, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I know because it's バブルリード (baburu rīdo) (pronounced "leed"). It it were "Bubble Lead" as in the metal, it would've been バブルレッド (baburu reddo) (pronounced "ledd").—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 21:52, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Robot Masters

I've started a discussion about including Robot Masters in Mega Man articles. If you have an opinion, please remark here. Lumaga (talk) 06:25, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Inafune content

Since no one involved has started a discussion, hopefully this will get things going. Rather than endlessly edit war back and forth, let's talk things through. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 22:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC))

• Not really anything to discuss. This is an anonymous IP vandal not an edit war. The anon has benn warned way more times than necessary to be blocked for disregarding the listed reliable sources, without actually adding a source to the article. Pointing to Gamespot is not adding a source, especially when it is less reliable than the sources being used already. Semi-protection is probably the only thing to do. It'll force the anon to register, then the single account can be blocked if it continues. Jay32183 (talk) 04:21, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Gamespot is not reliable? Is that your argument? seriously? (200.74.84.46 (talk) 15:09, 22 July 2009 (UTC))

200.74.84.46- Please stop reverting things back and forth to assert your position. Discuss it here in a civil manner by presenting an argument and reason with us.
Jay- I agree that the IP has gone about this issue in the wrong way, but that doesn't mean we ignore the information provide.

In regard to the issue, according to WP:RS, GameSpot is just as reliable as Nintendo Power, 1UP.com, and G4. The GameSpot source the IP listed is an interview with Inafune. In it, Inafune is quoted saying,

"I'm often called the father of Mega Man, but actually, his design was already created when I joined Capcom. My mentor [at Capcom], who was the designer of the original Mega Man, had a basic concept of what Mega Man was supposed to look like. So I only did half of the job in creating him."

I'd say that makes him a co-creator. Regardless, that distinction probably belongs in Keiji Inafune. Here we can probably use his current title or something generic in the first contested sentence. I don't see it being a big detail needed to understand the development of the game. However, I see nothing wrong with the second contested sentence, and recommend that it be left in its state before the edit warring began. Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:27, 22 July 2009 (UTC))

No, he's still creator, just being modest. The Nintendo Power article says the words "Creator Inafune", and that's the source for the sentence. Reader's need to have an idea of who Inafune is. The second sentence mentions Inafune by name because the source does. There's no mention of a development team. We don't want to say "work on" twice in the same sentence. There's still nothing to discuss. The anon's work just needs to be undone everytime. Jay32183 (talk) 18:03, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Jay- I understand that Inafune needs to be mentioned in the article. But modest or not, his own comment about assisting with the creation cannot be ignored, even if it's not used in the article. How about something like this:

"In retrospect, series producer Keiji Inafune described the game's development as... Capcom gave Inafune, then an artist and character designer on the first game, the chance create on a sequel..."

This gives more context to Inafune's description and his role in the game. I believe any mention of him being the character's creator is more relevant and appropriate to Mega Man (video game), Mega Man (character), and Keiji Inafune. Any thoughts or suggestions? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 18:30, 22 July 2009 (UTC))

That's not entirely accurate. Here's another Nintendo Power article from issue 224 which names Takeshi Horinouchi as the series producer. The opening sentence of the article also identifies Inafune as the "character's creator". Have a look Lumaga (talk) 06:38, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Inafune was the one who created the look of the original Mega Man , that makes him "the character designer", not the creator , because the concept and original idea was from another person. Also , Horinouchi only has worked as producer for the Star Force series, the producer of the original series and X series (x1~x3) was Tokuro Fujiwara, but he left Capcom in 1996. The first game Inafune produced was Mega Man 8.

You need to remember that a lot of people call Inafune the creator or father, that's why he made that statement about no being the creator during the 20th anniversary.(200.74.84.86 (talk) 15:11, 26 July 2009 (UTC))

If Inafune was the person who "created" Mega Man 2, then why is he credited[1] as "character designer" instead of game designer, game concept, planner , director or producer? (200.74.84.75 (talk) 15:29, 25 July 2009 (UTC))

As far as I can tell, one side is trying to maintain verifiability, while the other is trying to maintain accuracy. One thing I've learned through many long heated discussion is that when article content like this is disputed, researching reliable sources generally clear things up.

I tried expanding and tweaking things with some new sources I dug up. I hope it makes both sides of the discussion happy so this edit war can come to an end. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC))

A-class assessment

• Support Nothing I can really say negative about the article...you've done your research and it clearly shows. I have no qualms supporting giving this A-class.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:19, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support I looked through some of the references, and they all checked out. I can easily support this for A-class, good work. -- Nomader ^(Talk) 04:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Tracklist removal

I removed the tracklist for the so-called "original soundtrack" because there was never an original soundtrack released for this game. The only music officially released for this game is the "Capcom Music Generation Famicom Music Complete Works Rockman 1~6" released by Capcom on the Suleputer label, and the names here didn't even correspond with the names listed there.

http://vgmdb.net/album/255

The track names aren't anything you couldn't guess just by listening to the track, so rather than pretend there has been a special release for this game's music, I think it's best just to remove the listing entirely.

Hellacia (talk) 11:02, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Box art

Did anyone notice that Mega Man has two RIGHT HANDS on the box art image used in the article? Is that the real box art?? Hypermegamanboy (talk) 19:01, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

• It is the real box art. It was illustrated by some one not involved with in-game art. I don't think QA was too concerned with box art in those days; lots of games have unusual box art. Jay32183 (talk) 01:36, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Robot Masters list

I've added a list of Robot Masters to the article. I've read over past discussion in a few places, and there is consensus to at least have them listed inline (as opposed to a table). --- RockMFR 01:43, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

The only problem is that it seems to disrupt the prose. Removing the table formatting doesn't turn a list into prose. The names of the Robot Masters alone doesn't help the uninformed reader, and we don't have things to say about each one. I think I'm against it. Jay32183 (talk) 06:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Jay on this. I removed the robot master list on other Mega Man articles for two reasons: tables were full of trivia and fancruft, and the information didn't add anything meaningful to the article. I'd also like to see where this consensus was made. Lumaga (talk) 14:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

What is "meaningful" is entirely subjective. --- RockMFR 21:51, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

That list would be useful here in some form. I came to this article looking for that information, so saying that it doesn't help a reader uninformed on that specific information is patently false. I'm considering putting it back, and haven't done so already only because it appears to be in dispute here. Beyond495 (talk) 23:20, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Per WP:GAMEGUIDE, we avoid such information in articles. While the content would be useful to gamers, such level of detail is excessive for the layman and is not required for them to grasp the topic. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 03:30, 13 November 2011 (UTC))

That doesn't make sense to me, how does listing characters in the game detrimental to this article. Are listing characters in a movie detrimental to articles on those movies? Who decides these guidelines? Beyond495 (talk) 04:33, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

At the very least there should be a link to somewhere else that has this information. You would think a project that claims to provide "the sum of all human knowledge" would actually have all human knowledge in it. Beyond495 (talk) 04:53, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Typically, characters are only mentioned in movie articles only if they are relevant to the over-arcing plot. A similar approach is taken with video games. While there are many examples of other game articles that do include such information, any article that has undergone a quality review (like WP:GAN and WP:FAC) will omit that information to confirm with guidelines.

The guidelines are decided based on consensus determined by the Wikipedia community.

Who is the Wikipedia community? Where are they? Where was this particular determination for this standard made? Beyond495 (talk) 05:19, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

While there is not a link to a page on Wikipedia for the content, I can assure that the information is contained in several of sources used as references. Some are print, while others are web. A google search also turns up the information. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 05:04, 13 November 2011 (UTC))

I'll check again to see if a link was provided. While I don't understand or agree with these standards, they're beside the point. With the reasoning here, Wikipedia should just be shuttered and replaced with Google, which I don't agree with either, since often it's very valuable. Beyond495 (talk) 05:19, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Huh?

Wait, the list was there in the first place embedded in the article? When did this happen? Ugh, never mind everything I just said. Beyond495 (talk) 05:24, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Merging in the Robot Masters

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

It's been over three years since this discussion and it has remained open ever since. I think we can safely close this as no consensus. WTF? (talk) 02:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

---

Overall, the Robot Masters do not really form a very worthwhile list. It really seems like it would be best to split them between the different games. This is the only GA, so it seems best as a test to see if people agree. TTN (talk) 17:35, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't like the idea of having a lot of detail about the Robot Masters in the Mega Man articles (not that I support the Robot Masters article either). This article was recently promoted to A-class with only a mention of the eight Robot Masters in the game with a brief mention of two of their abilities. I don't know if the detail listed in the Robot Masters article is necessary. This article is cited well, and we would need to find a source that confirms the information listed. Additionally, listing the weapons and description of all the Robot Masters in the game does not further a reader's understanding of the game significantly more than what is already listed. See number 6 in WP:VGSCOPE. Just my thoughts. Lumaga (talk) 18:55, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

It wouldn't really improve on anything, but it also really wouldn't be too detrimental to anything. If the annoyingly large table and the cruft in the descriptions are removed, it probably wouldn't be more than 2KB, which could help that tiny plot section a bit. The main reason that I would like to merge them is because there is no way the the Robot Master article would ever be deleted in an AfD, and if it is just simply redirected, it would probably be restored daily by anons because "it's important." TTN (talk) 19:17, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the crufty descriptions would have to go, but then you're left with the name, a very brief description, and a weapon name. It might help out the plot section, but how much plot is there to any original series Mega Man game anyway? The Robot Masters list might just be a necessary evil. I would much rather improve that list than move the content into the game articles. Let's test it out first and see how nice of a merge we can get, but I have my doubts. Lumaga (talk) 19:37, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree Robot Master is in terrible shape and I don't think there is much there to salvage. There probably won't be much in the way of development either because most of them are fan submissions from regular contests held by Capcom. What about merging or redirecting to Mega Man (original series)? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:04, 10 August 2009 (UTC))

I don't read any Japanese, but I'm sure somebody could get some information about Capcom's contest from print sources. That might be some great info to get this to FA status. And as for Mega Man (original series), that article is in desperate need of some work. Lumaga (talk) 15:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I think the contests started after MM3; so the Robot Masters from MM4-8 are contest cubmissions. EGM reported on it a couple times. I think Inafune mentioned it too in some interviews. But it can all be summed up in a sentence or two. That's why I said there won't be much in the way of development information for the Robot Masters, because most of the characters were created by non-staff members and probably not documented outside of Capcom. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 16:09, 10 August 2009 (UTC))

I really don't care about what happens to the contents of the article (except for the first six, which should probably be merged to the character list), so if you think you can keep it redirected without an anon trying to revive it every single day, I'm fine with that. TTN (talk) 16:13, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, the million dollar question: how to get the fans to agree? :-p You got me TTN. Maybe post it at Wikipedia talk:VG#Some input. That'll should get some more input and maybe some suggestions to maintain whatever consensus we arrive at. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 16:25, 10 August 2009 (UTC))

I suggest a transwiki for the Robot Masters article, then a delete, or failing that, a merge.--_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 09:20, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Unnamed project lead:

The project supervisor of the first Mega Man invited Inafune to the sequel's development crew

Who is this referring to? It would be either Akira Kitamura or Takashi Nishiyama. Which is it? --Harizotoh9 (talk) 00:18, 30 July 2015 (UTC)