Jump to content

Talk:Naruto: Clash of Ninja/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Change it back

Please! Someone changed it! It has almost no ino about each game. Characters, stages, all gone. I cant change it! I dont know how!

STAGES! NOW!

they are doing things one step at a time so calm down and be patient Kyuubi29 14:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Dont care, everything was better before, now it was changed for no reason! Bring it back to the way things were! And seperate pre time skip characters from post time skip on the table of characters. NOW!

There was a reason. You just failed to notice the discussion. // DecaimientoPoético 02:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Sound Four and Kimmimaro

if tayuya is playable the other sound four might be playable i dont know about kimmimaro. Kyuubi29 14:44, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Deidara and Sasori wont be in Revolution

They definitely are not going to be in Naruto: Clash of Ninja Revolution. The anime is nowhere near this arc (or series, they are from Shippuden).

That isn't proof. You need to find an actual source saying they won't be in the game. ~SnapperTo 19:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

You don't need proof. The anime is no-where near showing any of Shippuden and they definately will not be in this game. AlexFili 17:25, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I Agree. Change it back.

This is a bad idea. These games, dispite being sequels to each other, all deserve their own page. There is now no room for boxart, stages, and now information is gonna have to be squeezed in just to make it fit. The character box is a pain to go through when all you wanna find out is which character in in ___________ game. If you're doing this you might as well combine all the Sonic Advance games into one, all the Pokémon games into one, and all the Dragon Ball Z games into one :/ 76.108.235.13 02:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Read, and move on. This is the format that's been decided to stay. // DecaimientoPoético 01:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I did read it, and ironiclly not many people agree with you :/ 76.108.235.13 02:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Box art and stage lists are not enough of a precedent to get the separate pages back. // DecaimientoPoético 17:13, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
There are more reasons. Let's see...the character box is a pain to get through, you have limited information on the games themselves, people can't tell which game Demon Fox Naruto is in, or which game Cursemark Sasuke is in, etc. And trust me, that's only the begining of my list 76.108.235.13 02:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I see your point with the Kyubi Naruto/CS Sasuke/etc. issue, but that can be easily fixed. Also, we're still in the early stages of merging these articles. Once the series pages are completed, we're going to focus more on adding reception, gameplay elements, and development of each series as a whole. If you wish to at least try to get things back to the way they were, you might want to come up with arguments better than "we have no box art!" or "it was better the other way i liked it as separate pages change it back!" since these seem to be the only comments we're getting. // DecaimientoPoético 02:27, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Alright then. Release dates, receptions of all 5 games (well, maybe 2 if you exclude 3, 4, and Ex) and more information on the games as individuals, not as a whole. Another thing, all I want is info on Revo., not the series, and there are very few external links on Revolution. Since this page is in early stages of devlopment, I'll tolerate this for now. But I do hope you plan on re-organizing this a lot more 76.108.235.13 02:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
We are not here to cater to your needs. If you want that information in the article you are perfectly capable of adding it yourself. ~SnapperTo 02:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Who said I wasn't gonna help? 76.108.235.13 02:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Your comment suggested you'd like someone else to do it instead. In any event, you can look to the old articles for information you'd like to transfer here, links to which are given below.
As you might notice, there is little information that is of any importance that has not been transferred here. Nevertheless, I'm sure there is something someone would like to see salvaged. Happy searching. ~SnapperTo 06:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Alright then. Thank you 76.108.235.13 02:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the others, CHANGE IT BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It was way better when each game had its article

It was not better when each game had its own article. We're merging the articles to refrain from having stubs with nothing but character and stage lists. Also, we're still in the early stages of the merging, so just give us some time. // DecaimientoPoético 17:13, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

It was way better the way it was before. Tho, putting them all together wasn't a bad idea, it wasn't a good idea because it as done poorly. Maybe there wasn't enough info to put an entire article about, but now they're together and the article doesn't feature enough information. If the info is too little to put a whole article for, then put ALL that little bit of info from all of them into one article, then it'll be the right size. Like in the 2nd game, it doesn't tell you how to do anyting, like the team battle. And in the 3rd game being able to switch between 3 characters in the middle of a fight. Or what systems they're gonna be on, because wasn't Clash of Ninja 3 going to being on the Wii in english while in Gamecube in the japanese version, and Shippuuden was the first to go on Wii in the Japanese version. What do you need time for? If there's time to merg them together, you can just copy all the needed info onto the other article instead of rewritting useless info. Axidous July 19 2007 (UTC)

I agree. The individual pages were more detailed. I don't know why most of the pages in the Naruto section are being merged too. Everything was fine the way they were.
The individual pages had a list of characters (present here), a list of stages (cruft and indiscriminate game guide material), and a few random tidbits. This article has expanded everything with sound references. The individual game articles don't stand alone well, and are better in this format. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 22:21, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

i dont care what it looks like as long as it has information..4.255.202.203 09:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Im the guy from, CHANGE IT BACK!!

cant we have a vote or something

if they say give them more time then give them more time. and deal with it because the are not changing it back. Kyuubi29 16:26, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Voting is evil. Besides, we already had a discussion on this matter, ending in favour of series articles. // DecaimientoPoético 22:55, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Who exactly includes "we"?

Please, the people are speaking. Get off your high ass and bring us what we want. Not just this series, but the ones on DS, PS2, and more. I want to see what characters will be in naruto path of a ninja. Now I cant. I want to see box arts, release dates, reception of the game, stages, and more. I want to see more info. This merger is crap and you need to change it. Nobody likes it. At all.

stop complaining. just give them more time. they are trying to add that stuff. just calm down. and please sign your posts.Kyuubi29 12:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
This is ridiculous. You (the IP) are telling me you're blindly arguing over this merge without even bothering to check and see if we had any kind of discussion on the matter?
Read the discussion, and if you have more problems, please bring it there. This way, we can refrain from having the same discussion over and over again on every single series page. // DecaimientoPoético 16:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I found out about it after it ended. Look, you messed up. Stop being a baby and fix your mistake.

Ok, lets change it back

I don't have to listen to your complaints anymore. We had a discussion, it ended in favour of series articles, there's nothing more to it. The series articles contain the same exact info as the separate ones, drop the box art and stage lists. I suggest you stop beating a dead horse and just live with it. Or why not be bold and do something about it besides complain? Nothing's stopping you. // DecaimientoPoético 18:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Need some help...

Nevermind, someone helped me. Thanks to whoever it is! 76.108.235.13 02:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Gamecube Stages Added

I finally added the Gamecube stages, but does anyone here know the Ex stages? 76.108.235.13 04:04, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the stages section as they are little more than different-looking backdrops. If they were a bit more interesting they might be worth of mentioning, though even then a simple mention under each game stating how they are interesting would be better suited. ~SnapperTo 04:18, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Seriously? I was working on that thing for hours...Fine 76.108.235.13 04:19, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Wow, you reply really quickly. Anyway, most fighting games don't list stages (and some, I've noticed, don't even list characters). Sorry for the inconvenience. ~SnapperTo 04:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, there's nothing better to do :p That's ok 76.108.235.13 04:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Things to do...

Now that we've made a step in the right direction (receives hate from all the anons above) by condensing the game articles, we can move forward. I'm torn between whether general reception and gameplay deserve entire sections of their own, noting changes throughout the games, or we can use the present sections and note changes in gameplay, development, and reception for each under their specific title. Perhaps a "general gameplay" section noting aspects present in all (or most at least) games would be appropiate. Discuss. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 06:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I like the general gameplay section idea. A general reception I'm not so sure about though, because you really can't compare a mediocre game like Clash of Ninja (my opinion) with one like Gekitou Ninja Taisen 4 76.108.235.13 18:48, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, added general gameplay :) 76.108.235.13 00:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Despite what I said earlier, I made a general reception section anyway. If anyone has anything to add, please do so, because I'm not sure if it is completely accurate 76.108.235.13 01:06, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

When I saw the x-play review, I remember clash of ninja 2 getting 2 out of 5.

Not true. I just checked it and it is 3/5. 76.108.235.13 11:21, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I just watched the video. It said 2 out of 5. Go to Youtube and put in clash of ninja 2 x-play.

Than the site and video have different responses, perhasps they are different reviewers. But as of now, it will remain as 3/5. 76.108.235.13 23:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

It was most likely a mistake. The video is the official review.

Demon Fox Naruto and One-tailed Naruto

Can someone please tell me what's so different between Demon Fox Naruto and One-tailed Naruto that they have to be listed separately? It's not very logical to me. // DecaimientoPoético 23:04, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Using my knowledge of GNT4, "Demon Fox Naruto" is merely regular Naruto with somewhat more aggressive attacks, a la his fight with Haku. I take it that this form is a separate character from the regular Naruto in the early games. "One-Tailed Naruto" is a new Naruto that relies on using his chakra-shield-thing for attacks, a la his fight with Sasuke at the end of Part I. This form is a separate character in GNT4. ~SnapperTo 23:35, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I see now. The separation makes a bit more sense to me, now that you have cleared up my confusion. Thanks, and I apologize for any inconvenience I may have caused earlier. // DecaimientoPoético 23:37, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

im confused

do the question marks mean that you dont know if they are in the game

That would be correct. Any unknown characters are marked with question marks. // DecaimientoPoético 00:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Who is we?

I've noticed in previous talks you say that we already moved in favor of a merger. Now I'm wondering, who exactly is "we"? If there was more support for a merger, so many people wouldn't be up in arms. It's seems that this "we" you talk of only included those who work on Wikipedia, not the ones who look to it for information.

It seems that these "many people" have yet to come up with a good reason for giving each game an article. There is next to nothing that was in the individual articles you can't find here. ~SnapperTo 06:33, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

That's not the point I'm trying to make. He said that more people wanted a change when more seem to want it back. Who exactly wanted it changed?

Everyone who took part in the discussion agreed on the mergers. It was not until afterwards that people started coming out of the woodworks to complain about it. It is nobody's fault that these people were unaware of the discussion. And, given their current arguments in favor of giving each game an article, I doubt it would have mattered whether they knew about it or not. ~SnapperTo 06:53, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

If they had known about it then they would lent their voices and there wouldn't have been a merger. The people who want it back seem to be those who don't edit but simply use Wikipedia. You can't really blame them for not being in the discussion. After all, we make Wikipedia for these guys. Shouldn't we do it the way they feel is most helpful?

It makes little difference if they had taken part in the discussion if they can't come up with a good reason for giving each game an article. It could be 99 against 1, yet if the only reason those 99 can come up with is "that sux", "this is stupid", and "ur gay", the 1 would win the argument. When they can come up with a good reason we'll take their opinion into consideration. And Wikipedia is not at the mercy of what someone might find helpful, hence the reason why my kindergarten teacher doesn't have her own article. ~SnapperTo 07:17, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Continuation of who is we?

It was said that more people were in favor of a merge, not more people had better reasons. Personally, I don't have a problem with the merge, but I can see what the other guys are saying.

You needed to make a new topic why? As I said, more people were in favor of the merge. At the moment that might not be the case, but when the merges were done there were more in favor. Until a time machine is built that fact is not going to change, and the decision is not going to be overturned until someone, somewhere comes up with a good reason to do so. ~SnapperTo 07:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

About starting a new topic, I have to use Wii internet and it only shows so many words when trying to make edits. Now, because so many people seem to like the old style, we need to take into consideration what the majority thinks, not just the ones who were in the discussion. That's all I'm saying! We can't just tell them to shut up. As I said before, I don't mind the merge, but our opinions aren't the only ones.

Yes, that Wii browser is far more troublesome to use than it should be. In any event, we should be satisfied that the majority can still find out what they want to know, even if they need to spend a few extra seconds to find it. ~SnapperTo 08:03, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that's going to make them stop their "this sucks" rants though.(By the way, you're right about Wii internet. It's killing my wrist!)

This crap discussion you so lovingly mention was just three of you agreeing. Nobody else knew. Now we do and you still wont change it back. You people think you own the place. You sicken my. Dfire!

There are only so many times Snapper can say this, so I'll say it this time. There could be two people against the merger, or 50, or 1000. It doesn't matter how many people are against it if they don't have legitamite reasons as to why we should use the prevous format (six pointless stubs), and so far the only complaints we've been getting are "i wanna see box art", "where the hell ar the stage lists??!!!11?!1", and "this way sux change it back now". I don't think those even come close to the actually legitamite reasons the users in favour of the merger used before we started merging. // DecaimientoPoético 14:10, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

"sighs" what is the use.Kyuubi29 13:11, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

To be honest, I am against the idea, but I am doing my best to help this page grow, since obviously my opinions alone won't change it. I have already made a reception and a general gameplay section and have added to the character box, and I am still looking for ways to improve this page. 76.108.235.13 20:58, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
And your help is truly appreciated. When more people (including myself) start contributing to these series article like you do, maybe we'll have less complaints. // DecaimientoPoético 21:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Perhasps we can add the appropriate boxart next to each section of the game. Maybe a shrinked version, so it fits. I'm also not very happy about the stage list removal, I know they aren't that important, but some people, including myself, want to know what stages are in which game. (It is also the most seen complaint from people who dislike the idea.) 76.108.235.13 23:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

i want stages, release dates, pre/post time skip mentioned on the character table, and boxarts. Then, I will start complaining.I will give you till saterday, understand?

No, I don't understand. Apparently if we add what you want us to add (which I'll point out you are very capable of adding yourself), you'll start complaining. Doesn't sound like much of an incentive to me. ~SnapperTo 02:28, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, I knew about the discussion, and I don't think merging it is a bad idea, I do however think tat it was done poorly. It didn't merge them. It took the ost obvious information that can aleady be known just by knowing about the game at all. 1 vs 99, 98 come up with that stuff you said, 1 comes up wit the merger, I come up with "put useful information for those who come to find out stuff so they don't come and read stuff they already know" The Character chart is ok so far, a chart of level could come doing the same s the chart of the characters. List all the levels, and put the game tittle, and do the "yes" "no" and "?" thing to save room. Or not at all since I agree levels arent too helpful. Though putting how to do something would be and telling all the features iividually would to. Since some things are different but close alike, you should put it becuase it wont take up too much room and will still clear things up for the confused readr. Tell what systems each game is on for both english and Japanese for the ones that are on a different consol in the different countries. Tell which part of the story it adds, all the controls ( like what does what skill, nothing too specific) and for each game building up tell the controls that allow you to do something that was added and not in the previous, what is unlockable and how to unlock them, and the release dates for each game in each country, and if it is for more than one console, then put all of which ones. Good enough?

Axxidous

What console each game is on and what part of the story the game covers is already given. The rest of your suggestions (with the exception of release dates) venture into game guide territory. ~SnapperTo 02:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Umm, so? The 2 things that's already up is good and all, and I was only suggesting ALL that needs to be up that's why, but the rest...you should still put what is unlockable. The specific sound tracks, the the team battle, the tings in the shop shoulb be listed. As for game gul, that is a very worthy bit of infomation to pu in the article. It was in the article for te game Shadow The Hedgehog, but they latr took it down. All it was was a chart. What's wrong with putting it up? It's not like it's putting up anyting specific like hoe to do sertain combos, or what tactics is best for setain situations...I just mean information that people actaully come looking for. Also, how come you two are the only ones talking in favor of not putting enough info? It's like te article on Neurotically Yous, it is smaller than any of these games and it has a large article of details. Now, I know it doesn't have a lo of stubs, but it has detailed information that is presice and clear. It' like desribing how a criminal looks and them drawing it. If you only give "between 4 and 6 feet tall, white, old, and a man" how are they suppose to know what to draw. Or asking somone to guess a number from one to 10, easy, 1 is a big peice of 10, but 1 out of a 4000. You have to ge all four digits right. Need more detail. Axxidous
And what unlockables do you suggest be mentioned? I'm not aware of anything unlockable aside from characters. As for the various modes, they are mentioned; team battle is mentioned under GNT4 (albeit not referred to as such). If some mode isn't mentioned feel free to add it wherever most appropriate. ~SnapperTo 04:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't classify it poorly. It's simply in stages of devlopment. I will add release dates as soon as I can, but I have a life and can't really be bothered to do it right now. I am considering adding detailed discriptions of each game, but sadly I only own two of them and information I have about the other four are limited and uncomfirmed. If you see something missing, feel free to add it as long as you know it's real, and you'll be helping greatly. (this was directed not at a single person, but to everyone that's complaining, critisizing, but not helping. 76.108.235.13 04:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not criticizing and complaining, I'm just saying, the information could just be tranported ovr, which isn't so hard, and the needed information can be added. The thing is, I don't have any sources for what I DO know so I'm not sure if I'm able to do it myself. Unless you all don't mind. Though, the only one with uncomfimed information would be Naruto Clash of Ninja Revolution, andfew on the shippuuden one because all except the last one is released, just not all in America. I also have a life a cat jus go around looking for sources, especially since the source thing isn't to good, it's like not really mentioning anything until it's 100% exposed of all it's info would be the same thing so we should only ever put info on already released things. Bcause also, some of these sites are used as sources, but what is THEIR source? Why not do what they do to get the info, so instead of relying on gtting accurate info from peopl, get the accurate info from whre tey do so then you'll always know you're right. Mmm, so you on't mind if I add some stuff right? Though, I myself don't know some info about it. Axidous

Read WP:V. Sourcing the games' instruction manual, official players' guide, the official website, and verifiable video game publications (GameSpot, IGN, Famitsu, etc.) are always fine. And really, someone just needs to add the information now. Copy editing can fix structure and grammar issues. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 06:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

We need...

We need stages, the special moves of the characters, unlockables, and boxarts. Ok? (the awesome coolness person)

Stage/unlockable/special attack lists: cruft. Box art: decorative fair use images that would do more harm than good to the article. // DecaimientoPoético 23:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
One boxart image would be acceptable, as per List of Bleach Agent of the Shinigami arc episodes. One for each game, however, is excessive and fair use abuse. ~SnapperTo 03:03, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Image added. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 01:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Sourcing needs

Ultimately, the character table needs to be sourced. Whether it's via sourcing the instruction manual, a game guide, or any reliable source, it eventually needs to be done. If anyone has the above (as I am bereft of any of these games), please add sources. Thank you. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 01:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

The best way of finding the characters is by scanning the instructions manuals or the back of the box art. Both of these show a large majority of the playable characters. For others, seek videos or magazine scans.


If I may ask..

Excuse me, but where exactly has Ino Yamanaka, Temari, and Sharingan Kakashi (along with S. Sasuke) been comfirmed? Unless I get a reliable source, I'll take it as speculation as opposed to a fact and remove it. 76.108.241.23 21:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Ino, Sharingan Kakashi, and Sharingan Sasuke are playable in Clash of Ninja 2. Temari is playable in Naruto Gekitou Ninja Taisen 3 (Clash of Ninja 3)Kyuubi29 16:34, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I think he was refering to Revolution; at least, that's how I interpreted it. At any rate, Sharingan Kakashi was confirmed in a picture some time ago. As for the others, I don't think they were confirmed yet. // DecaimientoPoético 16:37, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Now that you mention it, I do remember seeing a picture for Sharingan Kakashi, but Temari and Ino will have to be removed. 76.108.241.23 20:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

no ino is a playable character because i saw her in a picture on ign.com see right here http://media.wii.ign.com/media/856/856011/img_4745176.html 4.255.202.203 09:43, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Characters

I will show the website i read it from.. but it said theyre not done with the characters and theyre will still be more(stages too)

Im Confused (again)

whats with the little numbers beside the checkmarks

this makes no sense

if you can transform into demon naruto whats the point of having him as a seperate character4.255.207.208 23:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Because he's a separate character in some games but fused into Naruto in others. // DecaimientoPoético 01:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

im talking about naruto in clash of ninja revolution

You should really be more clear on that the first time you post. In the first two games, Demon Fox Naruto can be selected as a separate character; however, in other games, he's been fused into Naruto himself. That's why you see the 1 next to the check mark indicating his fusion with Naruto Uzumaki.

it still doesnt make no sense4.255.204.67 23:03, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

How does it not make sense, may I ask? In the first two games (not three), both Naruto and Demon Fox Naruto were individual characters. Starting from the third, by pressing down-b (back-b in later games) Naruto and a few other characters can transform into alternate forms, in this case Demon Fox Naruto. One-tailed Naruto, however was only in Gekitou Ninja Taisen 4 as a completely different and individual character, so don't get him confused with Demon Fox Naruto. 76.108.241.23 10:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

ya you didnt even make sense either. in NCONR if you turn into naruto and you can do his special why make him as another character

He is NOT another character in Revolution. He has been comfirmed to be an in-game transformation. 76.108.241.23 13:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

then why do you have him marked down as another character4.255.205.215 23:48, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

This is the clearest way I can explain this: Demon Fox Naruto is a separate character in Clash of Ninja and Clash of Ninja 2. In every game after that, he's fused into Naruto Uzumaki (meaning you have to hit certain buttons during gameplay to use him). When one character is fused into another, we add 1 next to the check mark confirming them. We have Demon Fox Naruto's Revolution appearance marked with 1 because he has been fused. The reason we have him listed as a separate character is because he's separate from Naruto in the first two games, despite the fact he's not in Revolution. If you still don't get it, I honestly don't know what to say. // DecaimientoPoético 00:43, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

website

i found a conr website that confirms alot of characters

which is it
It doesn't help unless you give us the link. // DecaimientoPoético 01:23, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I think

i think that temari and kankuro have been confirmed in the latest edition of nintendo power

I'm aware of that (it's been stated a few times in edit summaries), but it has to be cited. That means adding <ref>[[Nintendo Power]] issue #, page #, etc.</ref> (or something akin to that). Without the reference, no changes to their playable appearance will be made and kept. // DecaimientoPoético 03:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Hinata

Hinata is also confirmed in a screen shot at http://media.wii.ign.com/media/856/856011/img_4745180.html

thats sasuke and kakashi4.255.205.215 23:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

confirmation

This is for CONFIRMED characters only. DO NOT change whether or not a character is playable in a game without proof. Any edits that do not give sources in their edit summaries or on the talk page will be reverted.

where does it say that all those characters where confirmed

Which characters are you refering to? It might help if you were a bit more specific. // DecaimientoPoético 16:02, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

temari kankaru kisame

I'm guessing you mean Kankurou. Besides, Temari and Kankurou do have a source. Not sure where they get Kisame though.Darth G 04:21, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Kisame, along with Itachi, has been cited. // DecaimientoPoético 15:17, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

wheres the site

Do you even bother looking for yourself every once in a while? http://news.softpedia.com/news/Naruto-Clash-of-Ninja-Revolution-The-Fact-Sheet-from-Nintendo-56346.shtml // DecaimientoPoético 23:58, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

yes i do

when i clicked on the link that is SUPPOSED to show where temari and kankuro are confirmed it just showed a nintendo power page

That's because we're citing a magazine, not a website. // DecaimientoPoético 17:31, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

then how do i know if theyre confirmed

We cite the magazine name, volume number, and page number. If you have the magazine, then you can see it for yourself; however, if you don't have the magazine, then you can't. Big deal. There are millions of people who use this site, and I'm sure more than a handful can confirm our reference to be true. // DecaimientoPoético 02:28, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

then take it off since i cant see where they are confirmed

That's crazy. Books are sometimes used for references, whether you like it or not. We're not about to start removing every instance of a, let's say, manga reference in the Naruto and Bleach character articles just because you don't have the volumes. // DecaimientoPoético 20:37, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

GNT4

To help with what appears to be an attempt at sourcing the playable characters section, I was going to go through and source GNT4's instruction manual for most of the characters. Aside from the fact that I'm not sure how best to source them ("Naruto: Gekitou Ninja Taisen 4 instruction manual, page 24"?), I don't think having have a ref for each of the 16 pages characters are listed across would be a good use of space. The number of refs could be limited to 3-4 since most of these characters are indicated as playable on the back cover of the game, though I'm still not sure how to word that ref. Thoughts? ~SnapperTo 04:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

See Final Fantasy XII#Gameplay. And note that if someone finishes adding refs to the character table and the gameplay section, we can nominate this article at WP:GAC for GA status. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 04:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
And you'd like 16 of those? ~SnapperTo 04:31, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Ideally. Alternatively, we could consolidate them into a single ref for an entire section of the table. Yeah, that would likely be better, except for CoNR, which will still have seperate refs. Just state p. x through y on the cite. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 04:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

My concern with the current format (for GNT4) is, does the instruction manual give a list of all playable characters? Not being in possession of a copy myself, I don't know who or what is covered inside the manual. However, I doubt it lists all characters, in just 20 pages especially; the only instruction manual I know to list all characters is the one for Heat the Soul 4. With that said, I think we should find a better source for the table. // DecaimientoPoético 20:53, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Mizuki, Awakened Hinata, Akamaru, and Karasu are not listed in the instruction manual. So no, not all are listed. To revisit my question from yesterday (I having misunderstood the original answer), would you like 16 specialized refs for the characters that are listed? Since that seems impractical I'll again bring up the fact that most of the characters are indicated as playable on the back cover, lessening the total number of refs needed were it to be used. ~SnapperTo 21:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Man, it's a good thing I checked the talk page just now. I just went through and cited most characters from GNT4 using visual references (yes, I know, I'm going a bit picture happy with these references), but decided to check back here first in case I got a response.
At any rate, if no one has a problem with my newest idea (though originally suggested by BCR), I propose we use <ref name="Guide4">{{cite book|editor=Tomy|title=Naruto: Gekitou Ninja Taisen 4 Japanese instruction manual|year=2005|publisher=Tomy|language=Japanese|pages=24-39}}</ref> for one character (which should be Naruto, since he's at the top of the list) and then simply <ref name="Guide4"/> for the other characters in the book. // DecaimientoPoético 21:53, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
If individual references are to be used, it should be specific references. Ergo, cite the exact page a character is on. Have as many references as required. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 22:05, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Characters

I Think since this game is a fusion of GNT3,4,EX. This Game Should Have every Character from the Sound 4 Series and kyubi Naruto and Cursed seal 2 Sasuke Since this Games incorporates a Shippuden Plotline and should Have Awakened Hinata. I mean if they are going to shippuden they might as well take everything and from the other Gamez.

We'd still need confirmation on the characters before adding them to the list. Also, with only 14 new characters being added to the series, I don't think we're getting every character in the table. // DecaimientoPoético 16:58, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Naruto Clash Of Ninja Revolution Boxart

File:Http://www.saiyanisland.com/images/data/media/288/BoxArt.jpg

that is the boxart

its even on D3's press release site! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.230.43.196 (talk) 14:39, August 20, 2007 (UTC)

EX 2

I have the shonen jump issue # 38 and they say that all the characters from EX are going to be in EX 2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.27.18.121 (talk) 04:45, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

New update on IGN, more characters revealed for Naruto: Clash of Ninja Revolution

New characters were revealed in an IGN update for Clash of Ninja: Revolution, 8-23-07. The three new characters revealed were Hinata, returning from Clash of Ninja 2, and Shino and Tenten, both newcomers to Clash of Ninja. I added them to the confirmed character list, complete with references. DaRk StRiDeR 06:57, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

proof that Kiba will be in Clash of Ninja Revolution? sort of.

Kyle Hebert has confirmed on his blog that he recorded voice work for Clash of Ninja: Revolution.

http://gohanvox.livejournal.com/100560.html

does this work as a source for checking off Kiba as playable?

I don't know... is there a way to confirm for the skeptics (I'm not one, but there's some people that are pretty fussy about refs) that it's one: actually him posting on the blog, and two: that it is Kiba he voiced, as he has voiced two other character besides Kiba on Naruto? I have never doubted that Kiba will be in the game, and right now I have no doubt in my mind that it is Kiba he voiced for the game, but I think it's safe just to wait 'til the character line-up comes out soon on IGN. Again, this is to please the skeptics... if it was my Wikipedia, I'd add it right now. DaRk StRiDeR 09:42, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Deidara in Revolution!!!

Please stop changing the list of playable characters in Naruto: Clash of Ninja Revolution! Deidara is on that game and I have proof: if you search for Revolution cheat codes, it will tell you that Deidara is an unlockable character! Also the article itself says the game will incoprate around Naruto Shippuden. So please stop changing this, thank you!! Alpha296 18:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Source please. Until then, he's off the list.Darth G 19:24, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Our current wording is either poor or wrong (I'll take a look at it soon); I can't see any logical reason as to why we'd be getting a Shippuden game when it hasn't even been brought over to America yet and won't be until next year. Also, I'm sorry to say you're very gullible to believe that source of your's. The game hasn't been released yet, so how could people possibly have cheats for it? // DecaimientoPoético 23:26, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
G-d dammit, you think it's "confirmed" he's in the game because he's on the cheat list on IGN? Listen here. ANYONE CAN SUBMIT IGN CHEAT CODES, AND WHOEVER SENT THAT IN WAS DUMB. Before, some people thought this game would be a port of EX (Shippuuden, in which Deidara is first shown) when Clash of Ninja MVZ, now Revolution (pre-Shippuuden/time-skip before Deida is shown) was announced. So, because you can unlock Deidara in THAT game (EX), someone thought you could in this game(MVZ/Revolution). But that is NOT TRUE, as the game takes place from the Chunin Exams to the Fight of the Three Sannin. Please try using your brain before updating the article next time, Alpha. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DaRk StRiDeR (talk • contribs) 23:52, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

Is Jiraiya, Tsunade, or Sarutobi/Third Hokage in Revolution

Can someone kindly tell me if there is proof that Jiraiya, Tsunade, and Sarutobi/Third Hokage will in Revolution? Because I was just wondering, after all I want to play with my baby Tsunade when I get it. Jiraiya & Sarutobi are just characters I want to try out. Alpha296 18:41, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Until you see a check mark and a little number in brackets besides it for each character, I'm sorry to say they're not in. // DecaimientoPoético 01:58, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

CHANGE IT BACK! CHANGE IT BACK!! CHANGE IT BACK!!!

I just want to say how much I despise this new layout. Why can't the games have their own articles? Why just list them in one article? I think it's stupid; people looking at Naruto-related articles could've just clicked on the List of Naruto video games link and pick the CoN game they wanted to look at. But now, they have to look at this crap heap. Can't we revert to the old style? This merged style is a total dung-heap. Everyone in favor of reverting back to the old style say "Aye!" AYE!! Link 486 21:51, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

How many times can we possibly explain this? This is a result of a discussion; so many people either didn't notice or simply didn't care enough to comment, so we merged the articles (I use the term loosely, as they were simply stubs and were doubtful to get any better). For more on all this, see: Talk:List of Naruto video games#Combining the game articles, #Change it back, #I Agree. Change it back., #I agree with the others, CHANGE IT BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, #Im the guy from, CHANGE IT BACK!!, #Who is we?, and #Continuation of who is we?. // DecaimientoPoético 23:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

And how many times do we have to tell YOU that we don't like this merger crap?! It sucks! There isn't enough information on each game; the only way to pack it in is, I dunno... SEPARATE ARTICLES?! It was fine before this mess happened. Also, did you even look at what I said about the thing at the bottom whenever you're looking at something that has to do with Naruto? I tell you, it's easier that way! You could be reading about the manga, look at a game or two, then just go back to where you were! It's a simple solution to this dilemma that could've been avoided altogether. And please don't slack off on the details and brush off what I'm saying. I really don't like that... Link 486 01:46, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Unless you have something better to say besides the fact you don't like it, it stays as it is. Merging the "articles" was the best thing we could have done with them. // DecaimientoPoético 01:54, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

i agree with the Link 486 dude AYE!!Airomanyo 02:34, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Again, you'll need something more than "I don't like it" to even make us consider moving it back. That, or you could just be bold and do it yourself. Though I warn you, you probably won't succeed. If there's nothing more you wish to say besides what's already been said, I suggest this discussion end. // DecaimientoPoético 02:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Naruto:_Clash_of_Ninja/Archive_1&oldid=1136252469"