User talk:Ixbran

Past discussions archived to...
 * Archive 1

=Mah Talk Page=

Re:DW7Empires
I've said it to you three times before, so I'll say it again. I'm not a heavy Warriors fan. This game doesn't look that appealing or interesting to me. Nearly all of the additions sound gimmicky or are rehashed ideas from other games (Koei or otherwise). Edit characters are there for shameless filler. And I didn't like the lazy character arcs in DW7 or its general play style, so this game appeals to me even less. But, since it has the branding "Dynasty Warriors", it will sell like hotcakes no matter how much I complain about it. In short, I won't be buying this one. I might rent it or play it at a friend's house to give it a shot, but that's about it.

The Warriors game which looks interesting to me at the moment is Shin Hokuto. It vaguely looks like a Hokuto version of the Gundam ones with unique character movesets, so that's a plus in my book. Can't say much else about it though. Sake neko (talk) 01:51, August 25, 2012 (UTC)
 * Geez, calm down. I'm just saying that, regardless of whatever WO3 says, those characters really had just one weapon. Regardless of type, those characters in actuality had only one weapon. It's like you're trying to pass them off as characters who actually had three unique models for power, speed, standard (Lu Xun and company). Yet you say the name is super important for some reason just because it's reuse in WO3. That just says to me that you have never touched DW6.


 * And yeah, even if I don't particularly like Warriors games anymore, that doesn't mean I am completely ignorant of them and have never played the newest titles. You sure are being insulting by implying as such. Sake neko (talk) 23:14, August 26, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm just saying my opinion because you engaged in conversation. I'm not even upset about the weapons or whatever; it just sounds like you haven't played DW6 and I was just trying to tell you what I thought.


 * I have never intended on insulting you, I'm just saying that's how it feels like when I read the changes you do. So, I'm truly sorry if that's how you take it. I can't change about how you feel with what I type. If you don't want me to respond, then don't leave a message on my talk page. It's the internet; I can forgive and forget because it's just words on a screen typed by someone whose face I cannot see.


 * Let's be serious here: you're sounding like an enraged fanboy, not the friendly well meaning type. You have a bad habit of flinging insults. I have not personally insulted you with crude slurs or vulgar words, but you seem to have no problem doing so and instead play victim like you did on my talk page. You need to understand that this is how you sound. I trust you aren't like that personally, but really, knock it off. If you're upset with something, just give it a break and be rational about it. Sake neko (talk) 23:35, August 26, 2012 (UTC)

Related videos
Please do not add videos to the global list. Adding it to the global list means the video will show on every page on the wiki even if the video isn't related to the page. If you're adding a specific trailer or promotional video for a particular game, make sure it's being added to that article's related videos list, not the global one. Kyosei (talk) 14:34, August 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * Just in case you didn't see it, by October 3, all of the page specific related video pages will be disappearing and will be merged to the global list. This is a change being enforced by Wikia to "encourage" directly embedding page specific videos into the article itself for more page views essentially. This is why you ended up adding to the global list instead of the page specific list. This was a preemptive move made by towards that direction without really informing anyone in a global announcement. Details, comments, feedback and questions can be left here. Kyosei (talk) 19:44, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Generics
I think it should just go to the dedicated generics page, it's what it's there for to begin with. The weapon moveset pages are for movesets that every playable character can use and share. Since this is something specific only to generics it should just go there. Kyosei (talk) 22:21, September 21, 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks fine to me. Kyosei (talk) 23:36, September 21, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Flail
Meh I'd just put it on the DW7 one. I don't see the point on putting it on the Empires one. Kyosei (talk) 00:50, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

Erasing
I only erase or move what you write if the information you write is not particularly true to what you're trying to convey. I don't treat in any way that is different than with a random IP editor, another user, or even with my own writing when I screw up.

You don't have to keep posting "because I have permission" all the time in the recent changes. It's great you're actually talking to Kyosei when you're not sure about something, but there's no need to keep naming me out like I have supreme grudge against you. I really don't. It's like you have a constant agenda against me every time you type that out. So, please stop doing that. Thanks in advance. Sake neko (talk) 02:52, September 24, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Zhang Chunhua
I'm going to have to re-chime on what Humble Novice has already said and would rather wait for the game release to know for sure if it is actually unique. Kyosei (talk) 15:22, October 4, 2012 (UTC)


 * Look, this is the Twitter campaign's title:『真・三國無双６ Empires』発売記念：エディット武将命名キャンペーン = "Dynasty Warriors 7 Empires Release Celebration: Edit Warriors Naming Campaign". There's not even a mention of "unique generics"; they're edit characters. How is that any different than any other generic character in the game, including the ones you can make in the game? Because they had a campaign to name them? That's it really.


 * And yes, you can change the color of edit parts. That's a feature that was showcased extensively at TGS. It's also something that's been coming back from DW6 Empires, except with slightly more detail. Sake neko (talk) 00:38, October 5, 2012 (UTC)
 * You're distorting the facts however. You can replace any character in the game with another edit character. That was also showcased at TGS, on stage even. I mean here's one of the Yoshimoto group comedians beating up his coworkers in battle. I just think you're giving these edit character unreasonable special treatment, when really they're not any different than any other edit character in the game. Sake neko (talk) 00:56, October 5, 2012 (UTC)
 * Even if Zhang Chenhua's face is not unique to her by a long shot, huh? You seem pretty set that they're are "unique", but it's been clearly demonstrated on multiple occasions both on stage and in news reports that the playable cast are the only uniquely designed characters in the game. If you want to stay in denial that are simply edit characters, then I guess there's nothing I can say that can change your mind. Or of how much I actually do keep up with this game, even with my lack of personal interest. Sake neko (talk) 01:13, October 5, 2012 (UTC)

Behavior
Alright, I've been pretty lenient on this matter because I know you tend to lean on the side of passionate fan. I can take the hits pretty well myself, I have a hardened skin of iron sometimes, but really, you don't need to resort to senseless name calling or baseless insults against other users especially when the other party does not do the same. I don't like how it seems like you feel you can get away with this either just because the other party in question is not an authority figure. Whether or not they are a mod or fellow user there's no reason to drop all courtesy. This is not just in the case with Sake neko, you've done it with me in the past, and other users.

Try to use a more respectful tone, you don't have to agree but there's no reason to not be civil. I'm not asking you to be sugar sweet, just less acidic and venomous. Take time to cool down before responding, not cracking at the whip to "try and get back" at whoever you feel has personally wronged you. Usually they're not trying to personally insult you and your intelligence, they're trying to give constructive criticism or correcting a perceptional error on your part. That's not a bad thing. It's ok to be wrong, no one's perfect. It's better to correct your mistakes then go on in ignorance of the fact and looking all the more foolish because of it. Try to be more open and accepting of this criticism and less biting of the hand. Kyosei (talk) 11:55, October 5, 2012 (UTC)
 * That's all I ask, that you're at least willing to consider the other party before immediately write them off as wrong and consider them "the enemy". You need to remember it's another person on the other side. You wouldn't really say these things face to face. Put yourself in the other person's place: if you read your own response how would that make you feel if you received that message. If only makes you feel more angry and insulted, it's probably a sign you should reword it.


 * Also, don't say things like: "Go back to editing those female dating RPG Games you like so much that never get ported out west because we all know its important to post information on a japanese-only game on an english speaking wiki". Not only is this an elitist attitude, especially since we're a wiki covering a Japanese video game development company, it's a bit sexist and ignores the fact that this is a wiki that aims to cover everything Koei-related. You're also ignoring the fact these "female dating" sims have played a historically significant part in developing the video game industry more so than the Warriors games in Japan. These "girly" games, make up a good chunk of Koei's revenue and helped to support the development of your Warriors games. There also seems to be a growing general interest in these games based on the wiki visitor statistics. Even if you may not be interested, plenty of other readers do not seem to agree. Also, IF we were to really take the stance that English-only games should be covered on the wiki, we would not talk about many other games you yourself are interested in such as:


 * Jan Sangoku Musou
 * Musou Orochi 2: Special
 * Sengoku Musou 3 Z: Special
 * Sengoku Musou 3: Empires
 * Sengoku Musou 3: Moushouden
 * Sengoku Musou Chronicle 2nd
 * Shin Sangoku Musou 6 Special
 * Shin Sangoku Musou Multi Raid 2
 * Shin Sangoku Musou VS


 * Again. Try to be more opened-minded, calm down and really sit down and think about what you're typing. I appreciate in advance that you will be taking this more adult approach in the future in your debates and responses. Kyosei (talk) 20:37, October 5, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Edit gallery
It looks fine though somewhat excessive as I don't think it's necessary to see every color combination for every outfit especially since we haven't done it for other games. At that point might as well let people play the game and see the different color variations for themselves. At best I think these pages should just showcase the different base outfits you can choose. Kyosei (talk) 06:39, October 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * ? I don't really see why you'd need to be on edge for. Did I say I was going to crop and delete the images? All I said is I didn't think showing all the color combos was necessary. You did ask for my personal opinion after all. Even if I may disagree with it, I'm not going to outright undo hours of work unless I find it totally out of line (i.e. incorrect/misleading information or lazy copy/pasta). In the end, the edit character page is free to show off all these costumes. Kyosei (talk) 21:00, October 14, 2012 (UTC)
 * I would think you would know me by now. If I'm going to do something, I do it as soon as I found out about. I'm not going to delay doing anything I can do right away. If I was really going to crop the images, I would've done it as soon as you told me about it. Kyosei (talk) 21:32, October 14, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Videoes
This is part of the change that was already discussed in this blog post and done by Wikia's bot. There's nothing much I can do myself as the only response Wikia gave to our complaints in the blog post was essentially: "We're sorry for the inconvenience, directly embed the related videos you want on the desired articles instead." I personally do not like it but again nothing I can do about it. I don't like the idea of directly embedding either as it tends to look tacky more than anything. Kyosei (talk) 01:25, October 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I don't see the need to embed any of the videos on any of the articles. Most of the videos that were uploaded here fell into one of three categories: promotional trailer/teaser, intro cinematic or music. I don't feel any of these things added much to the article it was related to, it was just something extra on the side bar which was fine. If we directly embed videos into articles, I'd rather they serve a more meaningful purpose such as an in-depth video to demonstrate some gameplay element in action as opposed to some random trailer which doesn't do much other than glaze over details. Kyosei (talk) 01:53, October 18, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Galleries
I'd only consider that for someone like Nobunaga. Most of them actually don't have that many images. Kyosei (talk) 23:00, October 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm going to be brutally honest here. It looks terrible, so I'll be undoing it. I'm considering doing something else with the galleries. Kyosei (talk) 23:22, October 31, 2012 (UTC)
 * I've made Nobunaga's gallery collapsible. I feel this is a better solution in the long run for this wiki. Feel free to apply to other character pages you think might need it. Kyosei (talk) 23:58, October 31, 2012 (UTC)

Movesets
The category by itself already has just DW movesets. It doesn't need a sub category if that's all it's going to talk about in the first place. Plus, the most looked at pages in the first place are these movesets anyways. Those top, most visited pages in the category already lists the ones you say need highlights. I think you're just being biased again for DW series, and I'm just kindly asking you to knock it off. Sake neko (talk) 06:36, November 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * The reason why I'm undoing it is because these weapon moveset pages are really not that hard to find as you are claiming it to be. Look at the top visited pages in that category before you changed it. Look at that the top visited game pages on this wiki on the gallery view. Those pages are linked everywhere, even spammed multiple times on character pages if need be. I think people aren't as daft about wiki browsing as you claim. Even a simple search result can give you the same pages in a breeze. I think you're just being biased for DW again. It's great you're excited for the game coming up, but what you're saying doesn't necessarily justify the means. Sake neko (talk) 06:48, November 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to bother undoing your changes, since I know from past experience you'll just throw another hissy fit about it no matter what I say at this point. But I will comment on your "how stupid people can be" remark. Are you that narrow minded and distrustful of others that you actually believe that? Yeah, you can say this is the internet and everything, but that's a pretty shallow assumption you have of random visitors if you'll use that as a "fact" to defend yourself. Sake neko (talk) 07:42, November 9, 2012 (UTC)
 * This is going to sound harsh, but being protective and defensive over your edits is NOT wiki contributing. You'll see this on Wikipedia, and you'll see it here too for the edit box: "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then don't submit it here." Try to understand what this really means, the warning is there for a reason. Wikis in general are open to the public and readily adaptable for anyone to change. If you're going to keep that attitude about your writing and other people, it's just contradictory to this wiki's purpose in general. I've accepted what this means a long time ago, but it seems you haven't. The edit wars you like to pull prove that. Really think about in the future when you want to add something to this site. Sake neko (talk) 08:11, November 9, 2012 (UTC)

DLC
I've never liked that organization because it's extremely biased. It places parts and accessories over everything else and it implies they are more important than anything else on the page. And it completely ignores the actual scheduling for these things as they are released. I would actually prefer merging these by date and listing them out in one big package ala this page, because that's how it actually is at present. Sake neko (talk) 18:05, November 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * It's going to be awhile before even DW7 Empires sees the light of day in the west either. If people are following the JP DLC page, it'd be nice to actually see the legit order before things are skewed yet again. Also, that just goes back to my previous argument of it looking extremely biased. You're still stressing that these should be separated when there's no need to do such a thing yet. In fact, there's only a slight likelihood that we even need to do so knowing the localization team at TecmoKoei as of late. They translate things so literally that I wouldn't be surprised if this is the order it is kept or if they merge these sets together anyways.


 * Personally, I would prefer a proper looking DLC page for DW7/DW7XL for once because that is one of the flaws of the current DW7 DLC page as it stands now. It doesn't include everything. Sake neko (talk) 18:23, November 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm complaining mostly to you because I remember not too long ago that you were the one saying "how important it is to know and find individual DLC", when really you only seemed to care about costumes and weapon skins. I could do the DW7 DLC page, but I feel that defeats this wiki's purpose: "anyone can edit". I'm egging you on to feel proud about even proposing that game's DLC in the first place by finishing it. It's hypocritical when you were the one who was so persistent to cover it in its entirety and ignore it at the same time. Sake neko (talk) 18:46, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

I could translate the DW7 stages from the Japanese site and you can match it up with whatever the English site say. The pricing for these packs are the same throughout, regardless of the update. Sake neko (talk) 19:05, November 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, never mind. It's not my place to force someone to do something they don't want to. The offer still stands, but only if you're willing. Sake neko (talk) 19:18, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

To which I say, it's still not accurate to call them that. Anyone who has played a DW title in its entirety can tell you that Zhang Liao and Gan Ning are far from having the strongest strength stat or what have you of their particular faction. They mainly have historical praise and character popularity going for them. That point is mostly valid for the other three. In other words, don't just copy and paste information without thinking if it's a true statement or not. Sake neko (talk) 07:47, November 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * So wait for the game then and see it for your own eyes rather than working from third hand information. Don't be a "messenger boy". Or have someone who has played the game themselves edit. This wiki needs more active editors anyways. Sake neko (talk) 08:07, November 18, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Animal symbolism
It was a very redundant page. Not only does each faction page tell readers these things already, each character symbolism section for every character page does this too and in greater detail. At best all it did was glorify Dynasty Warriors and glossed over everything else as not important. Kyosei (talk) 04:18, November 23, 2012 (UTC)


 * This still goes back to my other point in that it is way too generalized and glosses over a lot of details. It doesn't even cover all the animals represented in the Warriors Orochi series much less Samurai Warriors ones. It even skips a lot of animals mentioned in Dynasty Warriors too and also makes the assumption that only the animal symbolism is important. Not every character is represented by animals. It also ignores any animals that don't appear in these games and therefore has an even narrower focus and feels like it's intentionally biased in it's representation of animals. There was a lot of problems with the page, and really would've been over-bloated trying compensate for everything by over-generalizing. A lot of these animals can and do represent different things on a case-by-case basis. Having this page here choosing the middle of the road general description is misleading and assumes every character represented by a certain animal adheres to that meaning, which they necessarily do not. Kyosei (talk) 04:46, November 23, 2012 (UTC)


 * I thank you for trying to defend me, Ixbran, but it's not like Kyosei's criticism was a personal attack against me. If my article was insubstantial, then my article is indeed insubstantial. It's as simple as that. After all, it's better to move on and learn from one's own mistakes rather than just lament over it, right? I personally think that editors like us shouldn't be so attached with our own work despite the amount of effort we put into them due to the malleable nature of this site. Also, disrespecting administrators is a very bad move since not all of them are understandable, reasonable, or patient. It may be hard to swallow for some who take pride in their contributions, but they'll come to understand someday. Humble Novice (talk) 06:23, November 23, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Chin
No not really. Kyosei (talk) 18:59, December 3, 2012 (UTC)

Re: Wordmark
Wordmarks can't be changed by anyone except for admins and Wikia staff. As for the actual wordmark you made, I'll be frank in saying I think it looks too busy and honestly don't like the idea of a holiday themed logo. Kyosei (talk) 17:22, December 4, 2012 (UTC)

Shooting
This is a really old idea. You can say the same thing about Columbine and Doom that those boys supposedly enjoyed. BTW, this same guy also liked Pokemon too supposedly. But really, are you willing to support the idea that we should associate the DW series with the unrelated yet unfortunate losses the victims' families have suffered? Or are you just morbidly happy that DW was finally mentioned in the mass media? Either way, while I feel really, really sorry for those what these poor families have had to endure, it's in bad taste to mention it here at all because it's like you're happily supporting that DW is essentially being used as an excuse for what the man may have done.

Think about that for a moment, and please never bring this up with me again. Sake neko (talk) 04:00, December 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Also to quote Team Four Star with complete seriousness, "Ixbran! Too soon!". Sake neko (talk) 04:22, December 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * To be honest, you didn't make your own feelings very clear with that first post. It seemed like you were being swept away the silly scandalized spin on things by posting those news reports, and that got me miffed. Also, please look on Komatsuhime's talk page for my personal opinions on this matter. And I apologize for offending you. That was never my intent. My intent was mostly to express how your post sounded like to me and my opinions regarding that. If that's how you feel about this, then I'm glad. Then let's drop this topic and hope that the poor families recover together. Sake neko (talk) 16:58, December 18, 2012 (UTC)

Sima Yi
should only get a mention on his own individual page regarding how many games he has been in Wei. Even more to the point, he's the only case in which an official "faction change" has taken place (even then not really since DW Jin is just late era Wei anyways). Unless Omega Force goes out of their trouble to actually revitalize this franchise by scratch and give individual representations to many of the factions they focus on, which doesn't seem very likely in the foreseeable future.

If a single sentence on his page tells you this, then there's no need to say it on the series's page as well. Sake neko (talk) 00:13, December 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * If the gallery view bothers you that much, we could always go back to the ye' olde version that was up before you probably knew about this wiki because honestly I'd be all good for that too. Otherwise, just be happy that all the characters are there and accounted for, OCD or not. Sake neko (talk) 00:26, December 28, 2012 (UTC)

Re: Featured article Or simply why I don't want to feature what's popular
Seeing the voting is supposed to be a community thing that no one is using anyways I take it upon myself to to simply feature good articles that I know casual/general visitors will not look at unless they are featured and use a thematic rotation for the article's subject matter. As you can see based on the featured articles list, I like to change it up: character-based article (Japanese, Chinese, misc), game (unlocalized, localized) and then to something miscellaneous such as a developer, voice actor or real world concept article. It's boring to feature something everyone probably has already seen or commonly knows about Koei. In general, most readers are going to come for Dynasty Warriors related articles. Now back when this was just a Dynasty Warriors wiki, no problem it's what you expected to see. Now that the wiki's broadened its horizons beyond that scope, I'd rather not go back to simply featuring Dynasty Warriors related things. Koei is a company so much more than that and deserving to show off more of its history and variety and the featured article is a good way to highlight this. Theme for this month is a localized obscure game. Next character based article won't be featured til March and it will be a non-Asian character. Kyosei (talk) 06:48, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

about Yueying
I know it's a nitpicky issue, but I still don't see your reasoning. The questionable phrase for me is... Not much is known about her historically... There are many stories of her being considered an ugly woman , by Chinese terms, for her time .

It should be obvious that she's considered ugly by Chinese terms, given that the stories come from Chinese folklore, she's a Chinese figure, and the stories are from that time, long ago. The phrasing is redundant. You claimed that... "there are people online who claim she needs to be as ugly as Dong Zhuo to be historically accurate, so no I dont think its obvious." but I don't get what comparing her with Dong Zhuo has to do with the phrase itself. Especially with your next edit along the lines of "She was considered an ugly woman, but only ugly in terms of that time period," as if Yueying's feelings needed to be defended

It just seems to me that you're editing the article, changing wording around to suit your goals, albeit unconsciously. 108.8.11.190 03:14, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

oh, and I don't mean any personal harm by this, if that seems to be the intent 108.8.11.190 03:15, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

I just wanted to help make it more obvious to those who dont quite get it. Knowing that there are people who think that she needs to be as ugly as dong zhuo for her to be historically accurate tells me the message isnt getting across properly for everyone to understand. Ixbran (talk) 03:36, January 18, 2013 (UTC)


 * Whatever you say, I still don't think your reasoning makes sense. I'm not going to push the issue any further seeing as the edit is something minor, but I hope you really consider what I said about changing wording to suit yourself. By the way, not that it matters, but I do have an account on the Wiki, just never logged in seeing as I don't really get on to edit anymore. 108.8.11.190 05:31, January 18, 2013 (UTC)