Jump to content

Talk:WWE 2K

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleWWE 2K was one of the Video games good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 1, 2008Good article nomineeListed
November 29, 2022Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Neutrality violation? Are publishers editing the 'Reception' part?

[edit]

The Reception part of this article seems biased. Games that get moderately positive reviews appear to be cherry picked, no matter how old they are, and there are no negative reviews. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.53.153.115 (talk) 11:53, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Always were. Noone cares. At least in our country's Wikipedia part. 178.127.213.16 (talk) 13:08, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

[edit]

Can we look at protecting the article, as this user: 70.161.75.254 and others keep vandalising it. --Guns2006 13:18, 15 Sept 2007.

Shawn Michaels and the Sharpshooter

[edit]

Shawn didn't have the Sharpshooter on SD!2 KYR. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.6.170.251 (talk • contribs) .

You're right. See the GameFaqs page at http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/psx/game/914104.html. I'll remove the mention. --Jtalledo (talk) 15:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Backstage areas

[edit]

It's been a long time since I played it, but I'm fairly sure SmackDown 2 had the ability to go backstage, a feature the article currently says was introduced in SmackDown 3. -- Oberonfoxie 22:40, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow... A lot of errors.

[edit]

Okay so I was going through the list of characters in each game, and I noticed some characters listed as being in games they weren't and other characters listed as not being in games that they are (or should be) in. Now personally I don't think too many of the '08 characters should be confirmed or denied until the game is officially launched (that is excluding the characters who have appeared in promo ads for the game). But one of the issues I saw was that Road Dogg was listed as being in '07. Now I own the game, have beaten it several times, yadda yadda, and I know for a fact that he isn't in the game. I'd fix this myself but I'm too damn tired to go ctrl-f and search Road Dogg to mark him as not on the list (yes I AM that tired x.x). Just thought I'd point out the fact that this list needs a massive overhaul. Maverick Leonhart (Talk | Contribs) 02:58, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:SVR2008.png

[edit]

Image:SVR2008.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Wwesmackdownhctp.jpg

[edit]

Image:Wwesmackdownhctp.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Smackdown vs raw 2009

[edit]

what site did the writer of the bottom set of information where it says SmackDown vs Raw 2009 will feature over 150 superstars --81.99.46.64 (talk) 17:20, 6 March 2008 (UTC)chrispowellathome[reply]

Well i put the THQ vs Jakks part. But i didnt see anything that says SmackDown vs Raw 2009 will feature over 150 superstars someone else put that. So im going to remove it cause theres no source. MC RIDE (talk) 23:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:WWE SmackDown (video game series)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. Okay, let's take a look:

  • "is a series of professional wrestling video games that is developed by" Watch out for obvious redundancies. "that is"

 Done GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • "YUKE's Future Media Creators" The compnay's name isn't capitalised in the WP article, so I'm assuming it shouldn't be here. WP:MoS#ALLCAPS. Inconsistent with subsequent usage of the name.
  • The lead should be a comprehensive summary of the article, yet it makes no reference to the game's reception.
  • "Since the release of WWE SmackDown! vs. Raw, to date," May mean something different several different months down the line. State the actual year.
  • "prompting the renaming of the series, to the WWE SmackDown series". No need for the comma here.
  • "at basic fundamentals." Not sure about this—if the fundamentals itself means the basics, then isn't describing fundamentals as basic redundant?
  • "where a new control scheme improved the grappling system of the game, called" A pedanticone maybe, but isn't stating that it was an improvement a personal judgement? A may be widely accepted or obvious, but better to be safe with something like "altered".
  • "Unlike the previous games, where the player pressed two buttons to perform a grapple or an attack, with the new control scheme, players were able to place their opponents into a grapple position, where they choose to perform a move by moving the directional buttons of their system's controller". "with the new control scheme," breaks the flow of the sentence and is needless. Could do with "could" before "choose".
    •  Done
  • "to move a meter (labeled "Submit" and "Escape") towards the end of the meter" Meter towards meter? Reword for clarity. I don't know, use "marker" or something.
    •  Done
  • The "Gameplay" section is too long for my linking, although I do realise that it's a series article. However, a lot of words is used to convey very simple concepts. For example, look at how much is said to convey that submission changed from tapping the buttons to move the analogue stick. Needs an effort to make things more concise generally and cut out minutiae.
  • "amount of damage conducted to the player's chosen superstar" Strange word choice. Why not change to "inflicted"?
    •  Done
  • "area; Yellow represents" Why is there a capital letter here?

 Done GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I feel that it's needless to go into specifics and that the section could be easily cut down in places. For example, why do you have to go through what each colour represents?
    • Because it is part of the gameplay, it is major, as it is one of the main reason the player measures the damage done in a match, and leads to them losing or winning.--SRX--LatinoHeat 16:21, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "There are four ways to win a match in every game, by pinfall" Could do with a colon instead of a comma after "game".

 Done GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Disqualification, pinfall, submission, and countout are all enabled by default, though they can be altered in an options menu, where they can be enabled or disabled" In my opinion, this sentence is needless—saying whether something is defaulted or not is the most minor of details. Saying that they can be "enabled" at the end is pointless since you've already said that they're enabled by default.
  • "When players selected dirty, the superstar is booed by the audience in the game, oppositely, the clean is cheered by the audience." Firstly, if referring to players as "cleans" is in-game jargon, then it could do with speech marks around them so it doesn't appear as informal text. "Conversely" sound more professional than "oppositely" in my opinion.
    •  Done
  • "The stamina system is measured by a meter on the HUD, the meter decreases when performing a variety of moves." watch out for comma splices; needs a semi-colon.

 Done GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • "where they draft superstars onto their brand, set champions for their brand, and set up rivalries for their brand; all to compete with the opposing brand." Brandtastic!!!! Resolve by reserving "for their Brand" in the last part of the listing.
  • "This mode, unlike the rest of the games, tended to blur the lines between kayfabe and reality." Could do with a source. Actually, the stuff beyond that needs to be revised. Watch out for original research; don't refer to the reader as "you".
  • Remove the comparison to the other series in the following paragraph.
  • "left with only their bra and panties." When using the words outside of the actual context of the match name, don't use colloquial/informal language.
  • "was released, the online gameplay was improved,". As mentioned above.
    •  Done
  • "called RAW and SmackDown!, names to reflect WWE's television shows." Put "which were" after the comma.
  • "The game in production when the draft occurs, includes those draft changes." Remove the comma. "game" should be plural.

 Done GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • "The series features a create mode, where players are able to create their own wrestler and move set, or the moves the wrestler is able to perform." Reword for better fluency and clarity.
  • "Create mode" uses the word "enhance" over and over again. Not only is it repetitive, but it's personal judgement.
  • Mentioning subtitles and such stuff in "Development" is related to gameplay not development, unless it can be linked with actual development processes and rationales.
  • "received better reviews from IGN," I know what is meant, but it is actually saying that the reviews were of better quality and weren't more positive.
    •  Done
  • it improve from the" Should have been proofread. Generally poor prose. Needs a proper copyedit.
    •  Done
  • Try to align the review box to the right, as done in Mana (series).
    • It was aligned, someone messed it up, but I moved it back.
  • Incorporate "Games" into "Gameplay". Too short for a standalone section.
  • The Mobygames link contains barely anything. Consider removing it.
  • Many refs don't contain dates even though it's given in the source. Even if it's part of a whole topic, the date needs to be present in every source. Needs publisher, retrieval date, date and author.
  • Ref 27 is just a URL, as is 25

 Done GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've also done minor copyedits to remedy multiple other issues. Too many issues. I'm ambivalent about failing it or not, although I'm leaning towards fail as I could not say that this is a well-written article. The sourcing is also poor. Therefore, I will ask for a second opinion from my GAN mentor User: Giggy. Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 15:19, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A seven-day hold would be appreciated, as that would be more than enough time for a thorough copyedit. GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:43, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've gotten most of them. Just need to get the rest. Cheers, --SRX--LatinoHeat 16:21, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, all of the concerns have been addressed, your response would be appreciated. SRX--LatinoHeat 17:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You've done an excellent job making the amendemnts. There's a few niggly thinngs I missed previously before I can pass:
  • "disappointing." Needs a source to state who said this.
  • I'm sorry I didn't notcie this before, but I've just realised that "Reception" is referenced exclusively by IGN. These sections need a variety of sources to be balanced and neutral.
  • Overlinking: an article only needs to be linked once in the article. Remove any instances of multiple links to the same article.

I've also copyedited the article more. Fix these and I'll pass the article. Ashnard Talk Contribs 19:10, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've addressed all your concerns, any further comments?SRX--LatinoHeat 20:25, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's pretty late where I live. I'm going to go to sleep, wake up, and then have another look in the morning where I'll most probably pass the article. Thank you for your hard work. Ashnard Talk Contribs 22:03, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've passed, although I would still like the "Reception" to be slightly less IGN-centric. Thanks for your hard work. Well done. Ashnard Talk Contribs 07:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bring back curse info

[edit]

I don't know who removed that. That was very interseting information. I was very surprised when I read that. Someone should put that information back on the page, but in a proper section, the same way the Madden page has a section on the Madden Curse. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.71.117 (talk) 16:18, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It constitutes original research which is not allowed on wikipedia. If you can find a reliable source for the info, it can be added back in. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 16:19, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I guess that the actual games and real-life events are not reliable resources. One should be able to find sources online. I know WWE.com had information on Jeff Hardy's house burning down. If I find the sources, could it be put back up? (sorry. misread what you said. I'll find sources and post them here first then the article page.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.71.117 (talk) 16:35, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SvR 2010?

[edit]

What's your source for this so called "WWE Smackdown vs Raw 2010?" I haven't heard anything about it. Danny Boy 420 (talk) 14:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It has been announced on WWE.com. Go there for proof. Michaelclarkc (talk) 01:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.216.2 (talk) [reply]

Split

[edit]

Shouldn't the Smackdown Vs Raw series be split from the Smackdown! series? They are NOT the same series.24.137.94.89 (talk)

THQ has confirmed that it is the same series.--Truco 503 17:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Number and list of WWE Superstars /Characters for the specific game articles

[edit]

Hello, i was wondering why the playable Wrestlers arent listed in the wwe games articles. I asked me why not because other Gameseries have such lists included in the more popular cases

it could simply look like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_vs_capcom_2#Playable_characters the wrestlers wouldnt need any additional infos. its just to show the readers which wrestlers are in the game. Greets, GBK2010 (talk) 11:12, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. There is an article soley for that and I think that it could easily merge with this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:ACC2:500:30AB:A7EF:7A2:8CA7 (talk) 12:30, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WWE Smackdown vs RAW 2011?

[edit]

Below the external link it reads in the SvR section WWE Smackdown vs RAW 2011, where did this come from, and is it in production? Tropical Devastation (talk) 20:46, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Road to WrestleMania

[edit]

It should create an article called "Road to WrestleMania", giving information about this story mode that has been watching from WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2009, bringing who the "Road to WrestleMania", which game has been and what has been the argument of each story. I think so.

Thanks for your time. --Ponce (talk) 00:14, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

History Section?

[edit]

I was thinking of a history section for this page because non-gamers don't know why the series had to change it's name. Do you agree?--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 21:37, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The gameplay section basically covers the history of the game. Other than a few name changes, there isn't much else to discuss other than the gameplay. Maybe a mention in the Development section would be more appropriate. --Jtalledo (talk) 02:11, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Take-Two/2K publishing era

[edit]

Just thinking outloud here, should the Take-Two/2K stuff be included like I see somebody did? The way I see it this article is about the THQ WWF Smackdown series and it's yearly iterations (and name changes). While TT/2K got the rights to publish WWE video games and while THQ did the other month say that WWE '14 was in development, I don't think the TT/2K stuff should be included in this article (atleast in the fashion it is currently) until TT/2K/(Rockstar?) announces their plans to continue the current WWF Smackdown series (or until a run of the game appears with TT/2K/R* listed as the publisher in retail). Info about the WWE games that are not part of this series aren't included on this page so IMHO it would make sense to not include the TT/2K info until they confirm (if they confirm) they are continuing the WWF Smackdown series instead of creating their own new series. Thoughts? Fisha695 (talk) 02:09, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it per WP:CRYSTAL. It's fine to say what was reported, but as it was, the blurb jumped to the conclusion that the series was acquired and would be continued by Take 2. --Jtalledo (talk) 16:04, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Currently the situation is that Take 2 is retaining Yuke's as developer, but it's not certain if the WWE series will continue in its current form. --Jtalledo (talk) 22:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Per 2K Sports' announcement, the series will continue as "WWE Games", starting with WWE '14, but with continued support for WWE '13. This article should be retitled accordingly. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:35, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Where does it say the series is called "WWE Games?" WWE Games has referred to THQ's brand of WWE titles as a whole (including other titles like WWE All-Stars), as well as the combined dev teams of THQ and Yuke's, not the game series formerly known as Smackdown. And the page at that link even calls it the "WWE Video Game Series." Also, the next entry is being called WWE '14 not "WWE Games 14." --Jtalledo (talk) 00:20, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't explicitly say it, but phrases like "future WWE Games titles" and "no need to worry that there will be any loss of continuity from the old days" suggest a series. The title of a game in a series doesn't need to have the exact title. If that were true, we couldn't consider any of the WWF SmackDown! or SmackDown vs Raw games to be part of a series called "WWE". Just like the name has changed before, it appears to be doing so again. Why exactly isn't All-Stars considered part of this series? InedibleHulk (talk) 03:05, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've found a press release which explicitly calls the series the "WWE series". Given this, I change my position and support a move back. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:48, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"WWE 2K" as article title

[edit]

Anyone else think this is a bad title? Most of the games in the series are called anything but WWE 2K. Maybe something less specific like WWE (video game series). I'm not saying that's the best title, just something better than WWE 2K.69.212.228.109 (talk) 00:39, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a lot of outdated information.

[edit]

Someone more experienced than I needs to go through and revise a bit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:ACC2:500:30AB:A7EF:7A2:8CA7 (talk) 09:09, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of the article is written as if it were still called SvR

[edit]

Many mentions to SvR such as "every time a new SmackDown vs Raw game is released" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:ACC2:500:30AB:A7EF:7A2:8CA7 (talk) 12:27, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on WWE 2K. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:50, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2017

[edit]

2605:6000:3F05:2800:25EA:56D8:2486:3C2A (talk) 18:29, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Murph9000 (talk) 19:32, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Worst game of all time

[edit]

Almost 20 years from wwe games past. Why in Wwe 2k18 and in its previous maximum 8 men can be in ring at the same time and no more? In games like Assasins Creed you can fight with numberless enemy and in Pes series are 22 player in land and they have their own fan in the game that, are more than wwe 2k18 and in many more games this is so. Really, 20 years is not enough for rich company to increase wresler more than 8 man like their tv shows? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.219.70.34 (talk) 15:56, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on WWE 2K. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:11, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Battlegrounds

[edit]

would battlegrounds be considered as part of this? it technically is called "wwe 2k battlegrounds"Muur (talk) 08:16, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. That's like saying WWE All Stars or WWE Day of Reckoning would also be included.Thecleanerand (talk) 11:50, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:22, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Page revamp

[edit]

I've cleaned up the opening to describe the publishing and development of the series in the second paragraph. There were no cited sources talking about the "Polygon count" so I removed that entry. I've merged the History and Development sections for easier reading, and revamped the Reception section to focus on the series as a whole. The Reception section was basically coping reviews for each individual games from their own sections; i've based my entry on the Metacritic review scores for the original game in comparison to SDvR 08 and the series decline in reception since then.Thecleanerand (talk) 00:38, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

[edit]

WWE 2K

[edit]

The following discussion 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.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found
Result: Delisted. Hog Farm Talk 18:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The page no longer meets Good Article criteria in my opinion, reception section in particular is almost empty besides the reviews of the game being listed in a box. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:40, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:WWE_2K&oldid=1204517094"