Talk:King's Field

Cleanup work

Yesterday I performed some significant cleanup work on this article: removing inappropriate external links, ensuring that the prose was not overly complimentary, and removing personal commentary and unreliable information. The ever-hopping user on the 66.248.* subnet has once again reverted this change, presumably for the same non-reasons as before. As these changes have made the article significantly less compliant with our policies, I plan to revert this change. If it is continually reverted to a version which in unbefitting of an encyclopedia then I will seek administrative intervention to prevent such edit warring. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup work

Demon's Souls and the words "spiritual successor" appeared no less than three times in the article. It's another game, and is mentioned in the first section, so I removed the other bits as they were not relevant. I added quotes to the dubious phrase in the top section. Some appearances of the phrase had quotes, some didn't. I don't know what Wikipedia policy is, though the phrase is a quote (translated) of something said by a company executive, and it's mainly a marketing term, because the games are far more different than similar. It may also be a way of telling King's Field fans their money is no good.

Also added was some supplemental material about the Moonlight Sword appearing in various From' games, almost mascot like. I felt bad about a mention of its cameo (par for the course) appearance in DS.

I removed the entire "Future" section because half of it was about another game (DS) and the other half was about a US company telling US fans it won't be making a sequel to a Japanese game, which is something that has probably never been done in history. So this is not news as much as not spoiling the magic for disappointed fans.

It's hard to imagine From Software not making another King's Field game, but it would probably be more likely to happen during times of relative good fortune for the company or later in a console dev cycle. For instance a lot of DS's cache could be quickly turned over for a new KF game. --72.173.160.50 (talk) 06:48, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, This was written before the release of Dark Souls, and I suppose I should note that Dark Souls was a wild success, over 2.4 million copies, so these are definitely good times for From software's Action RPG division. On the other hand, they may just choose to pour it into more titles from the Souls series than the rather less successful King's Field series, as any new release would really only be riding on Soul's coat tails if it wanted success. As for how different they are, I will admit that there are substantial differences, but that may be explained more by generational differences than any huge departure. The atmosphere of the games are similar, but the Soul's have more emphasis on combat, the KF series more on exploration. Both have bleak, minimalist stories, and both are incredibly difficult.108.131.27.125 (talk) 06:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

This is the same User above replying. I noticed the pages have shifted to using the Japanese games as primary sources, so I changed some of my edits from the past for consistent style. But I am writing to say something I was probably unwilling to say before concerning the discussion of future KF games here. Although I think From' has opined about bringing the series back on a second or third tier platform, I don't see how myself From' can really ever truly invest much into King's Field at this point, because of Sword of Moonlight. Because of SOM technically From' must share the IP with everyone since it's been given away. Technically it's even possible to say From' has given away their whole catalog since the Moonlight Sword ties all of their games together in a way. This is becoming less theory now because of my own work[1]. The SOM tool could even end up being Minecraft 2.0. I'm sure there will be future KF games. It may become the biggest series ever. But it's out of From's hands now. It's the first public domain franchise more or less. Which is appropriate since it was the first modern action-adventure game, and KF2 is the best 3D game there has ever been pretty much. It's going to be a killer app for VR I think--184.63.132.236 (talk) 14:05, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

^

There is a ref in here if anyone wants to put it back in. I'm assuming it's about the widely publicized "spiritual successor" quote.--67.54.192.52 (talk) 06:55, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Stub->B

I don't know if someone officially "rates" articles, but this page was marked as a stub, yet it seems quite complete to me. So I've taken the liberty to change it--99.197.224.57 (talk) 07:00, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Citation fetish

"You don't need to site everything ever, this is basic arithmetic, the Playstation launched on December 3rd 1994, and the game was released on December 16th 1994, that's a 14 day difference. You don't need to source MATH!" It's a 13 day difference, that's a typo on my end. But seriously, it's basic math. (Justyn (talk) 22:04, 28 March 2013 (UTC))

KF Additional - Limited, but still Real Time Battle?

"In all King's Field releases, except for the PlayStation Portable titles, battles are fought in real time, and usually involve maneuvering to land blows using melee weapons as well as casting offensive ranged-magic spells."

I played KFA yesterday, and while KFA basically is dungeon crawler done the old-school style (see Wizardry), the battles still are pretty real-time, with the biggest change being you just can't maneuver around as freely. I'm not good at Japanese, so I couldn't tell if you actually could maneuver while fighting, but I at least had to spend stamina that refilled in real time to defend myself with a shield and attack with my weapon etc and the weapon and shield went up or down as I pressed buttons. Might be worth changing slightly?

Critical Redudancy

"Critical reception for the series in general was extremely polarized in that people tended to either hate it or love it." "Others often cite these very things as what they like about the series." (and it stops there) The Critical Reception section is already marked as needing work but the redundancy is evident. --Nabulator (talk) 02:13, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 26 February 2018

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved as proposed. bd2412 T 03:30, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

• King's Field (series) → King's Field
• King's Field → King's Field (video game)

– Per typical precedent, the individual video game does not overshadow the notability of the series of video games. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 10:28, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Support, same reason as stated by ZXCVBNM. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 13:01, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

• Support. The first game is probably the least notable of the four. —Xezbeth (talk) 18:49, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
• Support WP:NCGAMESDAB recommends this. -- Netoholic @ 10:40, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.