Talk:Sabre Wulf

Removal

I've moved the following bit from the article to here as I'm not at all convinced it's proven/provable, having visited the reference. If anyone other than an actual Spectrum can decipher Spectrum data just by listening to it then they're obviously cleverer than me. Still, it would certainly be worth including if true, so I'll leave it here for now until someone can prove it. Miremare 09:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The tape loading noise of Sabre Wulf was used as the sound effect of an expensive new XRF machine on CSI: Miami (season 1, episode 13, "Bunk"). Ref:http://matt.west.co.tt/spectrum/csi-miami

It's not a question of deciphering, because a Spectrum's tape output is not encrypted or otherwise specially encoded. There is PC software that reads it, such as ZX Spectrum emulators, but a person cannot tell what the data is... --84.250.188.136 (talk) 04:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

This might be based on the fact that certain modem carrier tones sound very similar to the ZX loading signal. Back in my BBS days I rememebr a similar thread claiming that a ZX loading signal could be heard being transmitted by (or being received by - I forget which) Vjer in the final few minutes of Star Trek: The Motion Picture a_man_alone (talk) 19:52, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Package

I was looking for information about the game's original packaging for the Spectrum. Is it a Knight Lore -type black box or a smaller case? Also, is the "mobile phone" in the platform list supposed to be some kind of a joke or wat? --84.250.188.136 (talk) 04:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

It was a Knight Lore-type black box. I'm pretty sure that I've still got it at my parents' place. All Ultimate titles from Sabre Wulf to Nightshade were in those boxes. From Gunfright onwards they reverted to large format (double capacity) plastic cassette boxes. And prior to Sabre Wulf it was all single capacity cassette boxes. I believe that the Commodore 64 titles Staff of Karnath and Entombed were the same. Hope this helps, --Plumbago (talk) 07:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

"Mobile phone" shouldn't be there, I've removed it. The mobile version of Sabre Wulf is a conversion of the later GBA game of the same name. Miremare 17:28, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Crash bug

[1] I would think that a magazine describing a bug as breaking one of the four cardinal directions of movement would qualify as "game-breaking" without exaggeration. In any event, I watered it down. – czar 00:00, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

The sentence read as if the game was unplayable in two-player mode, which was not true. Only joystick control was broken, it still could be played with keyboard; if any, it would have been "playing-with-a-joystick-breaking". The current version is better. Diego (talk) 06:17, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sabre Wulf/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 19:53, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Happy to offer a review. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:53, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

• "Ultimate, a developer known for its secrecy, had finished subsequent series entries in advance of Sabre Wulf, but withheld them for marketing purposes." I'm not sure I follow this.
• "They also upgraded the game's packing materials, which became an Ultimate standard." I'm struggling with this, as well. Upgraded from what?
• Is "begat" not a bit old fashioned?
• Your full screen link isn't going anywhere interesting
• "to defeat enemies that spawn at random from the ground,[3] such as" This doesn't quite work. Also, does your source specify that "indigenous people" are the enemy? Not just "baddies" or something?
• "Apart from the jungle, the game's settings include mountains and lakes." This doesn't really fit with the text around it- it should probably be moved to be along with the other setting info
• "The Stamper brothers" Who?

• I've clarified this. Tim and Chris Stamper were the founders of Ultimate/Rare (really I think they should their own article)! JAGUAR  16:34, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

• What's a "nondescript ... price"?
• "The company upgraded the game's packaging" On a rerelease? I'm not clear on this.
• "Crash wrote that" Personification- lots of examples of this. It should be avoided.
• Are Dingo or They Sold a Million worth redlinking?
• You probably don't need to include the magazine's publishers in the references
• Could you check your sales figures? On Google, I'm seeing 300,000, rather than 30,000
• I love to see the odd academic citation in pop culture articles, and there's a few hits on Google. This is one, and I'll have a look at the others another time.
  • Niedenthal, Simon (2013). "Color". The Routledge Companion to Video Game Studies. New York and London: Routledge. pp. 67-73 (see p. 68). ISBN 9780415533324. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |editors= ignored (|editor= suggested) (help)
    • "The designers of the first video games made the most of color limitations, and the best of the early 8-bit games possess a jewel-like beauty. The environments of Sabre Wulf (Ashby Computers and Graphics, Ltd, 1984), a game for the Sinclair ZX Spectrum, glow like stained glass, and the effects of color purity are enhanced by contrast with the black background. Sprite-based games, in which individual game elements are animinated against a background, often display significant contrast between figure and ground, a feature of the process by which the image is drawn on the screen. Indeed, [it] is fair to claim that there is a lot of black in early games, and not just those set in outer space."

Nice little article- I've not "finished" the review, but I'll save this for now. I want to look a bit more closely at sources (though first glance, I like it! It'd be so easy to fill up your bibliography with blogs...) and the images. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:01, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

@J Milburn, thanks for the review! I think I've addressed everything, if you'll take a look. Some replies: it's funny, because I write "begot" and am corrected to "begat" (which is actually the archaic construction) and vice versa. I prefer "begot" and find it to be a rather handy word. The term the mag used was "natives"—I think it's better to let the source speak for itself in this regard. Stampers were recently redirected at AfD, otherwise the article/link would make more sense. They could very well fill their own article, but they're so intertwined with Rare that I'd rather see them covered more completely that one article for now. I didn't redlink and Dingo and They Sold ... because I couldn't find any detailed sources. Still thought they were worth mentioning, though. Personification: In almost all of these cases there was no author (or the author was untraceable initials) so the review truly was on behalf of the magazine. (Usually the case with older game mags.) Even if it wasn't, the metonym should be fine when a reviewer is clearly writing on the magazine's behalf as its sole opinion. Should be fine. I like to keep the refs as complete as possible—writing about older games almost veers into archival research. I know that by the time I get my sources on Nintendo's arcade machines (from the handful of archives that have copies of relevant secondary sources), I might as well publish an original piece than cite it as "verifiable" in a WP article (is it actually verifiable if it requires more than university access?) I digress. Sales: I had written that the sources conflict. Retro Gamer said it broke records and CVG (the source is linked, if you want to verify) said it sold 30k and not so well. I'm of mixed mind on academic sources, though I added it anyway. I'm on my way out of the academy myself. Let me know if there's anything else? – czar 19:38, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Great, thanks. Some quick initial replies before I go through the article again. First, if you're going to include publishers for the magazines, consistency would be good, but I'm not going to hold up the review with it. Second, with regards to the personification issue: I respectfully disagree, and see your approach as inappropriate for formal writing. I wouldn't object to "Was described in Magazine as" or something similar, I just don't like "Magazine said that". That said, again, I'm not going to hold up the review with the issue- it's a stylistic rather than substantive disagreement, I think. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:58, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Quick drive by comment, it might be worth dropping in a very small amount of technical info; for programmers it is impressive that the full extent of the Z80 chip, undocumented flags and all, is used in Sabre Wulf. For a while, a good test for whether or not a ZX Spectrum emulator worked properly was "does the rhino run backwards in Sabre Wulf?" (google "sabre wulf backwards rhino") I appreciate it may be difficult getting a good realiable source for this (here is a random mention on the web), but I think it's worth dropping in. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:10, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

• The theme music is the opening bars of Prelude and Fugue in C major, BWV 846 - can you work that into the article? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:27, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

@Ritchie333, thanks for the tips. I added that the game begins with a Bach selection, as one source said. I'm afraid the specifics may just be trivia, as I can't find any reliable source that has discussed it. I've used the reviews from (almost all?) magazines at the time as well as retrospective stuff, and after doing searches for both the Z80 rhino and the specific Bach fugue, no RS has found it important enough to cover. (Though since this is documented on the talk page, perhaps someone might try again in the future.) Hey, if you like these articles, you might want to review my Knight Lore GAN... I'm planning on doing the rest of the Sabreman series in the future. – czar 16:15, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Now I would argue it is not really original research to say that it's Bach's Prelude BWV 846, since the musical score for the that is available in its article, and you can listen to the tune by playing the game, and find its the same thing. It's just straightforward observation. Gerda Arendt - you're our resident Bach expert, how do you feel on this? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:34, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

I would offer a free score as a source, - off to concert, Beethoven, could read only last question, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:57, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

I'll say this once and then shush .... guidelines are not rules to be followed slavishly, and I think it's likely (from personal experience) somebody playing Sabre Wulf will listen to the music, think "what's that", read the article and be none the wiser. I do not believe is is "trivia" to provide a link and nothing else. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 08:57, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

As a reader, I would be disappointed to verify that citation and find the specific piece unmentioned at the source. The RS did not put special importance on the Bach opening, so the compromise was to add it at all. Even if you claim IAR, I don't think the specificity improves the article. Feel free to take it to a broader venue if you strongly disagree. – czar 09:21, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Best thing to do I think is get a third opinion and go with that. However, you've made a good point that what you put in was a compromise anyway, so perhaps it's best to leave it be. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:27, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

My two pence would be that it's not OR to identify the piece of music, as at the very least the game itself is a source - is the music being played Prelude & Fugue? When something is so obviously verifiable just by listening to it, we're in danger of wondering is the sky blue? As a reader I find such comments fascinating, and enjoy reading them in other articles - when I played these games for real, I was but a mere teenager, and had little knowledge of classical (or more specifically non-copyright) music and in my more advanced (hem hem) years find it interesting to see what pieces were chosen. Many other ZX Spectrum articles contain comments to identify the music being played, and not all are sourced, as many are blatantly obvious. Chaheel Riens (talk) 11:17, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

I think it would potentially be OR to identify music, but I do question how significant it is if no reliable source has deemed it worthy of a mention. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:49, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

• @J Milburn, I think your concerns were addressed, if you'll take a look – czar 15:49, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm happy that this is basically ready for promotion. The sources look solid, the images are justified, the writing is good, and I'm left with a good idea of the topic. Nice work. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:09, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Dingo (1983)?

In the final paragraph of the Reception section there's currently a reference to a title named Dingo, ostensibly by Ultimate. I'm not aware of any such title, nor is there a Wikipedia article on it. Anyone have any ideas? --PLUMBAGO 08:20, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Plumbago, Dingo was an arcade only game by ACG licensed from Jaleco. Fairly low-key compared to stuff like Donkey Kong, but it looks a lot like Sabre Wulf, at least at first glance.

• Dingo at Arcade History[2]
• Remake at Tardis.dk [3]

Chaheel Riens (talk) 09:32, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Ah-ha. That explains that. Cheers! --PLUMBAGO 13:43, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Flip screen edit

You can't ask for support on the article then frantically revert every edit made to it in response!

"the prose should be accessible to people unfamiliar with jargon like "flip-screens", and this is the compromise"

This is the whole point of having wikilinks. If the reader is unfamiliar with a term (or we think they may be unfamiliar with one) - we link to it so they can understand it better. We don't clutter up the article itself by detailing or summarising the linked term.

Moreover, by splitting the definition of the maze into two paragraphs - you've now reverted to a definition of the flip screen maze in one paragraph, and then in the second paragraph the description of the 16x16 flip-screen makeup of the maze. If you want clear prose, then surely it would be better to consolidate the maze composition into the one paragraph, rather than split it into two sentences across two paragraphs?

And as a final point, the existing prose of "...he loads in the corresponding continuation of the maze" has to be about the most jargon-esque statement I've ever read outside of a technical manual. Sabreman doesn't load in anything. That's just bad phrasing.

"scripted bosses not in body of article"

Yes they are: "indigenous people, sleeping hippos, and a fast wolf" are mentioned, admittedly not as "bosses" and the natives get two mentions, one as before, and also as a hint "Personal Computer Games found one such tip: that the indigenous enemies will play a sound when they align both horizontally and vertically with a piece of the amulet."

Incidentally, this tip is obviously wrong even though it's sourced: they chatter when horizontally or vertically aligned - unless they were actually on top of the amulet it's impossible to align with both axis, and that would be no help at all. Chaheel Riens (talk) 11:23, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

(1) I assume you'd know through the BRD process that editors propose a change and the change is either left or further modified or otherwise brought to discussion, but there certainly isn't any "frantic revert" happening. (2) "Flip-screens" are indeed jargon in that they are terms a reader unfamiliar with the game would expect to be explained. If you don't like "corresponding continuation of the maze", feel free to rephrase it but that's not jargon. (3) Clarity comes from unfolding in a natural order. The first paragraph is about the game's basic mechanics—the reader doesn't need all maze-related details shoved into the same paragraph. The second paragraph goes into more reasonable detail after the basic premise is finished. (4) If the sources don't distinguish the enemies as bosses (regardless of whether they call them bosses), then we don't distinguish them as bosses either. I think I found a compromise for the "indigenous enemies" part. (5) If you have time to give a substantive review with the FA criteria, I suggest that you do so at the FA review page. That would be the best place to discuss whether it's necessary to define "flip-screen", etc. Appreciate your feedback, czar 17:40, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't dispute that flip screen isn't jargon - that's why we wikilink, so that people can understand these terms. I thought I'd made that clear? I'm also familiar with BRD, which is why I brought the "D" part up here, rather than reverting you again. However, with regard to the bushfire if you really wish to claim BRD then I'm actually reverting your change made here a day ago when you removed the term. Technically that makes you in breach of BRD, not me!

Clarity comes from being clear. That can be done by condensing all the necessary details about the maze construction into a couple of sentences, rather than spreading them out over two different paragraphs.

I'm pleased you accept the PCG article being incorrect - I still maintain that it's also incorrect to say that the red orchid slows down Sabreman. While he does move slower than the normal "sprint", the pace moved is the same as the one when wielding the weapon - ie one of the standard moving speeds in the game.

I don't think I've ever commented on potential featured articles before - all I have is this link Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sabre Wulf/archive1 is that what you mean? Chaheel Riens (talk) 18:28, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Indestructible bush fire

You added the fire as "indestructible" last year—it had the same issues then. Please revert your edit—a "sentient fire" is no more helpful in that sentence...) As for PCG being incorrect, I think the best solution is often to simplify the point a source attempts to make if there is a possibility that a nuance of it is incorrect. In light of that, I had already removed the red orchard slow-down part. Yep, that's the link, and the criteria is at WP:FACR. czar 18:34, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

You wanted sourced entries, now you have them. Can't have it both ways you know. I may have added the indestructible word initially, but there's a much bigger time difference between that addition and your removal compared to your removal and my re-addition - or reversion as it was. The fire is sentient in this context - it seeks out the player, and also it is indestructible, playing the game shows this. Under the circumstances the act of playing the game counts as a reliable primary source, as well as the retro gamer article. Don't be pointy. You may consider yourself to be passionate about this article, but so do I. You may feel that my edits are not improving the article - as is your right - but I may feel exactly the same way about your edits. Chaheel Riens (talk) 19:34, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Let's see what the other reviewers say about the sentient fire, and I'll invite a third opinion if nothing comes up organically czar 21:08, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

I suggest "indestructible" as an alternative. It's evidenced by the gameplay, and clarifies an important part of the gameplay - the fire takes the role of Evil Otto to prevent the player from simply staying in one screen and farming the creatures for points. Chaheel Riens (talk) 22:53, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

We've already talked this out and I've already explained why I'm opposed to adding the adjective (it isn't in the source and it isn't necessary/helpful for understanding the game). If it was important to mention, at least one source would have done so. Outside reviewers will chime in soon enough. czar 00:06, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

No - the opposition to removing the adjective, not to adding it. It was present, then you removed it, and I reverted. It doesn't need to be in the source as the gameplay counts as a primary source.

• Added here on 12/12/15
• removed here on 22/11/16 - 11 months later
• removal reverted here on 23/11/16 - 24 hours later

It's important to specify the bushfire as being indestructible as it puts it in a different class of enemies to the regular spawns.

As per BRD then let's revert to the original version before the bold edit that took it out, and wait for other reviewers to comment on whether its removal is justified. Chaheel Riens (talk) 12:04, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

• I don't really know anything about this particular game, but I really don't think gameplay information can be sourced to the gameplay itself, as it requires interpretation and insight into how the game works, and reeks of original research.--IDV^talk 12:17, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Here's your source, courtesy of Your Spectrum, Issue 6, in their "Cry of the WULF" feature: "staying in one room for too long causes an indestructible flame to start licking at your boots; you can avoid that by exiting and re-entering the room every so often."

As soon as I figure out the esoteric reference section used in this article, I'll add it in. Chaheel Riens (talk) 19:55, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

References

Sabrewulf in Killer Instinct

I noticed a few years ago that this game and the werewolf from Rare’s Killer Instinct fighting game share a name (and spelling).

I have not played the original and am not sure if it’s meant just as a reference or is canonically related. There is no mention of this game on the Killer Instinct wiki.

I’ve added a notation to this effect under the Legacy section. Hobbesdream (talk) 19:54, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, this is noted in the hatnote at the top of the article. Unless reliable sources cover the connection between the two, there is nothing sourced to warrant mention in the article itself. czar 05:27, 15 October 2022 (UTC)