Talk:Soulcalibur III

Iaito

In order to prevent an edit war over Setsuka's weapon, I have decided to explain the situation of the term "iaito" with regards to her sword. It is not unheard of for Namco to release basic biographical information that is needlessly ambiguous, mysterious or even misleading. Many of these instances, however, can easily be overcome with basic detective work. BUT, Setsuka's iaito is NOT one such example of this type of ambiguity. Had her sword been labeled a generic katana, there would be reason to believe that her blade is, in fact, a shikomizue, as such a sword was often concealed inside walking canes. But Namco specifically labels her sword as an iaito, a fact that is hard to get around. And since they use the word "iaito", it is understood that they mean she has an iaito, not a shikomizue. Besides, "shikomizue," as far as anyone can tell, specifically refers to swords hidden in walking canes, not umbrellas; which would thus disprove the chance of it being a shikomizue even further. It is appreciated that people have studied up on weaponry and know that such a weapon exists--as it's not exactly common knowledge--but her sword is not a shikomizue and cannot be labeled as such. Namco calls it an iaito and that's what it will be. If you see it incorrectly labeled, it is kindly asked that you restore it to its correct state. Thank you for your understanding. NOTE: any sword used for the study of iaido can be labelled as an iaito (see second sentence in brackets http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iaito)

I think a great deal of confusion comes from the fact that Namco actually describes Setsuka's weapon as an iai (search Setsuka's profile for confirmation here: http://soulcalibur3.namco.com/site/index.html), which everyone seems to have misread as iaito. I believe Namco's use of the term iai sword simply refers to any sword used for executing iaido/iaijutsu, whereas iaito specifically denotes a low-cost practice sword made of aluminium - and there's no way Setsuka or any other warrior would have used an iaito to take on wrought-iron katana swords. 79.74.4.208 (talk) 22:12, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

New spellings for Korean characters

Namco has decided to follow the Revised Romanization of Korean with respect to the names of Korean characters. According to information found on the Project Soul Official Site and on Namco Channel, Seung Mi Na's name is now spelled Seong Mi-na, Yun Sung's name is now Hong Yun-seong, Seung Han Myong is now written Seong Han-myeong, and Hwang Sung Kyung's name is now Hwang Seong-Gyeong. The new spellings for Seung Mi Na and Yun Sung exist in the North American version of the game.

Character Creation

I just got the game today and haven't played it yet (no thanks to Wikipedia). I'm just wondering what all of the unlockable stuff for character creation mode is. Anointed Blade 04:27, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

That's what GameFAQS is for :p

character galleries

why were the picture galleries on the character pages removed? am I missing something? --Phil 21:37, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

new template

I have created a new template for use on soul character's pages. Template:Soul Character. it is, as of this post employed on Tira (Soul Calibur). it looks exactly the same as the current biography tables on the character pages except it will be a standard. also it lists the eng/jp voice actors inside the template so we can get rid of those ambiguous "western/eastern" voice actor posts.. --Phil 09:05, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Recent file corruption add?

I'm only a moderate SC 3 player, but can someone fact check the additions that 70.170.85.16 is making with the "file corruption error" adds? If anything, it needs cleanup.Thanks for any info that could help. NorseOdin 10:44, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Difficulty Citing

I was the one who added the "difficulty" section. I know wikipedia hates (I forgot what they are called) when people use words like "most people", "many think",etc. However, I came to this conclusion after reading several different reviews and based upon my own experience with this game first hand. Here's an insert from IGNPS2's review,

"It seems Namco took primitive criticisms to heart and created a computer opponent so challenging it takes steel nerves and flashing hands to best. In one match I eventually succumbed to Mitsurugi, who after a seven hit string of back and forth counters (like an intense tennis volley), finally landed a devastating upward swipe that raked me low to high and sent my character skyward, where I was promptly juggled before being kicked off a precipice. It takes real speed to hit the counters, but even seven of them didn't save me. Several of our own supposed SC pros also took turns trying to best one particularly hard version of Siegfried on "You're an idiot for playing at this difficulty level." It was over an hour before Jason Allen eventually scored a win."

http://ps2.ign.com/articles/661/661222p1.html

I hope this is a verifiable source. If needed I can cite other reviews. Thanks to all who helped contribute to that section of the article.

-Mag

Variable Cancel Technique?

Did anyone add information for this yet, yunno, G225. That is one thing that is currently causing alot of strain among players right now.

Just added something on it.

-Mag

This article does not seem neutral

the vast majority of the article seems to be critisism. if the majority decides that the game is that bad, fine, but that article seems to be one-sided. the article has a section for critisim, but none for praise. this should be fixed. Saganatsu 22:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

• I guess its hard to be anything but critisism when the game really has nothing to praise over its predecessors. SCIII is the undisputed worst game in the series and everyone knows it. --Jaxel 17:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
  • That kind of criticism is what makes the article lopsided. Yes, it has cheap AI and a few glitches, but it does have the Character Creator which is a nice addition along with different modes. And I'll tell you, Jaxel, that not everyone thinks that this is the worst game in the series. I find it a lot better than Soul Calibur II which I grew bored of a week from getting the game and mastering it. Not to try and make it seem like it is a direct flame towards you, but I am trying to show that arguments like that really could affect the article in question. I'll see if I can try to neutralize the article. Right now I am thinking about putting a Pros section and changing Criticism to Cons. If anyone wants me to do that, please let me know.--Cpubasic13 04:03, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Go for it... but character creator, depending on who you talk to, could possibly be a negative to the series. There was so reason for Namco to change the core fighting styles of most characters; and there was no reason for Namco to believe that the characters would be balanced without testing after changing almost everybody's core fighting styles. Many people wish that Namco had spent time to test the character changes instead of putting in half-assed create a character modes and 17 additional bonus characters who dont even have complete movesets. --Jaxel 17:31, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
      • Many people also enjoy the Create a character to a great extent. As for unbalanced characters, learn how to play them good and you'll find yourself crushing your opponents. --Anonymous 0:16, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
        • Character creation in no way makes up for the huge flaws that plague SC3, more than just "hard AI" and a "few" glitches. The game is grossly inbalanced and 4 months later, it is extremely boring. If you take SC2 for example, I doubt that you truly "mastered" it, because SC2 was far more balanced where the characters were predominantly mid tier. The characters themselves actually had depth. SC3 just through balance out the window, and the characters have absolutely no depth really. I was considered crazy for liking SC2 Cass better than SC3 Cass. The fact of the matter is that Namco really screwed around with her game, kind of like what they did to Talim, except made her top tier. In SC2, you were forced to actually think with Cass to force mixups etc. In SC3, she gets so much combo damage that they totally outweigh her nerfs...yes, she did have quite a few nerfs. By taking away lockdown tools and just giving huge damage potential, I am quite sure that I am much closer to "mastering" SC3 than i ever was with SC2, because quite frankly, in SC3, Cass doesn't need lockdown. Sidestep CH and the fact that the other characters are just crap compared to her pretty much lockdown the characters for you. I'm just of the opinion that it's not fun when you don't have to think about the game at all, and I'm quite sure that's its equally not fun on the receiving side. Pifactor 06:29, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
  • One member's opinion is not enough to justify a biased article. -Unknownwarrior33 02:16, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
• I think, with Eliashc's updates (which were way more effective than mine), the article is now balanced. Anyone else think we can take off the neutrality warning on the article? -Unknownwarrior33 16:13, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Echad 03:01, 5 May 2006 (UTC)I think it's ok now, still it reqires some expanding, maybe a Trivia section, and so on. I'll check back some time again and expand the article. BTW, I think you can safely remove the tag, it is st*pid anyways...

2 Pifactor - man, if you call "Hard AI" a "flaw", maybe you should go on with playing Mario for NES, no offence, but AI is controllable and it's not that the easiest difficulty is harsh, just you can't play on hardest, right? Just switch difficulty and it will be ok. And the only glitch so far is that "Data Erasing" thing. Unbalanced thing is Namco's best offer, since first Tekken - if they'll make the game balanced it will be too simple, with characters sharing same fighting techniques, while Namco' fighters usually approached with variety of different charas, possible of doing some things, that others can not and vice-versa... The game is not unbalanced-Smunbalanced, it just focused on characters, that are too different to compare; and tiers are just statisticsal. So nu, what are the problems? You got bored of game after playing it for 4 months and still not bored enough to write such a big thing about it here?

Umm...i never implied that hard ai was a flaw. I was criticizing other people who said that it was a flaw, as if it was the only flaw, which you would have understood if you read 3 or 4 posts before me. I'm sorry to say, but analyzing a fighting game by the AI is the stupidest standard to judge by. Fighting games are inherently designed to have a fun VS. experience. I was just clarifying things that people overlooked, because SC3 has flaws no matter how you look at it. Explain to me how this game is not unbalanced in higher level play. Focusing on variety is fine, but no matter how you look at it, they did a real lame job of focusing on it. You can still have a reasonable balance while maintinaing variety. You can also make all the characters fun to play at levels beyond basic button mashing. Proof of that is in SC1 and SC2. But that's not exactly what Namco did in SC3. Also, there are many glitches in SC3, impossible to miss would be the VC glitch throws and Mitsu's 88B VC. And BS about tiers being just statistics. Talim vs. Cass is inherently lopsided, NO ARGUMENT. Cass just outclasses her in every respect. Have you played this game at a higher level at all? Please do before insulting me about AI being to hard for me. Pifactor 19:23, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, for not answering so long, i completely forgot about this... Yes, i completed game at the most hard difficulty mode, and I found it pretty challengig, compared to the AI, that was

You must defend a dissertation about Cass VS Talim in SC3 =))) ... If YOU always lose to Cassandra, try to play against Sieg with a custom class character in a max difficulty, it is much worse...

Really, this is a fighting game, and as such, there IS defence for any strike and there is player's mistakes... outclassing and unbalancing is an point-and-click strategy/rpg term, where units/characters can really be weaker (lower HP , or damage, for example) IN FIGHTING there are no stats, all the players got the same HP and enough movest, to use some different tactics, that grants a win EVEN when the balance odds are off you (which is very rare, but there are chars, who simply got more useful strikes, than others, but it ALL DEPENDS on how YOU use them!)

IN VS MODE there are NO disadvantages... As AI is build around chara's strikes and it is simplier, than a person's mind, it nearly always contains flaws and unbalanced things... That only affect the AI vs AI matches.

IN VS you got BLOCK, THROW, JUMP, A, B, K, some more default strikes and combos, that can be enought (via defend - counterattack tactics) to kill a character even 10X your health... Really, it is all about timing, reaction, intuition, and an average game knowledge...

And, fighting game with bad, poor and weak AI should not have single player mode at all. =) SUCH, decent AI is required... Many players, who buy it don't even have the second controller for VS matches, and you say "I'm sorry to say, but analyzing a fighting game by the AI is the stupidest standard to judge by. Fighting games are inherently designed to have a fun VS. experience." OF COURSE, IF A MAN DOESN'T HAVE A SECOND CONTROLLER HE IS STUPID! =| ... This game is designed for BOTH single and multiplayer experience...

P.S. BTW, the joy is not in the balance... The first game in the series is the most "unbalanced", as some characters simply have better weapon stats (it is nerfed, when the default weapon is used), but it fees to me the most enjoyable... Try to play it.

P.P.S. Bugs NOT EQUAL Unbalance

Echad 01:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Crooked Jester Tournament Match Videos

So it was getting hard for me to update all these pages once a week with links to the new match videos; so I eventually stopped updating. None the less, I had a ton of referrers from wikipedia on Crooked Jester and lots of visitors sent me messages asking that I keep wikipedia updated on match videos. It was getting tedious and I didnt really want to do it. Not to mention, certain characters like Cassandra, Mitsurugi and Kilik started getting bloated in the match video list. We offer more then 20 vids for those characters and there was no reason to have the match videos section of their pages take up over 50% of the page. So what I decided to do something else instead; instead of adding each match individually, I rewrote the search engine script on Crooked Jester. I then added links that will query my server for a list of match videos featuring that character. This list is automatically reparsed every time someone clicks on the link here at wikipedia and it will add any new videos it discovers to the list! This makes it easier for myself and other wikipedia users in getting match videos. --Jaxel 02:46, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

PS. In case you were wondering as well... The village pump decided months back, links that required external logins were acceptable on wikipedia articles as long as those links explicitly declaired themselves to require external logins. In this case, I made sure to labeled them (external login required).

---

This article is indeed one-sided. I haven't yet played Soul Calibur 3, but the webmaster on fightersgeneration.com considers it to be the best fighting game ever made. Dessydes 02:58, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

---

Oh please!

>x<ino 04:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

What's with the sarcasm. Go to the website, and you'll see what I mean. And I was watching Cybernet today, and they didn't have anything wrong to say about the game. And anyway, a NPOV violation is an NPOV violation, regardless. Dessydes 20:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

---

the way it's not meant to be done

• Quote from Template:Infobox VG:

  This template employs some extremely complicated and esoteric features of template syntax.
  Please do not attempt to alter it unless you are certain that you understand the setup (…)

• No need for praise (at least not this way).
  • No need to mention features that are already mentioned (e.g. the character creation)
  • GameSpot already praised SC3, even a link is provided… (quote from the article)

  GameSpot awarded Soul Calibur III its "Best in Show for Fighting Games" award at E3 2005.[1]

• • If the game makes use of the most recent graphics features (or else), say so. But not "the graphics are beautiful". That would be biased.
    • Quote from GameSpot:

  (…) improves on its predecessor with a higher level of character and background detail.

• • • That's would be fact.
• elias.hc 04:36, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Right, and the rest of the article isn't biased at all. 24.15.49.150

It's a bad idea to have a whole section for criticism and it's too much criticism anyway - that makes it biased, but it's not about praising the game as much as criticising it but about providing facts instead of opinions. I'm not saying the article were good as it is but it's not going to get any better through praise. elias.hc 05:14, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

The first quote doesn't relate; the "Criticism" section isn't part of that template, and the addition of a Praise section doesn't harm the rest of the page. -24.15.49.150 16:08, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

It does relate. To this. Have a look at the infobox before and after. elias.hc 16:48, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Namco has officialy confirmed that the level of detail on characters is LOWER then its predecessor. However, it is true that the level of detail on the backgrounds are higher then its predecessor. The difference is, in SC3 you are further away from the characters; so you get a bigger view of the background and a smaller view of the characters. Namco decided to lower the detail on the characters and raise the detail on the backgrounds. Because of the displacement and distance of the characters; they only SEEM more detailed when in fact there are less polygons per character. --Jaxel 12:22, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

The original arguments against my edit are more than valid (since then I've learned not to edit Wikipedia under the influence of anger), but the suggestion that I intentionally messed up the infobox (given that doing so would not fit the edit comment "did some more balancing") isn't fair. -Unknownwarrior33 04:04, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Complete destruction

Somoens tottaly wiped the article , does anyone have a backup

AI, cons and pros...

Echad 05:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC) Err... There have been a talk on AI and I checked back the game at maximum difficulty and found it quite challenging, compared to most other games (at least last 5 years pass, since most games became too simple and easy), but, I had two 3 match winning streaks and stuck a little only at Zasalamel... The only "really tough" enemy would be Night Terror at gold in missions, and I'm sure there are lots, who kicked his skull back to the grave... So DIFFICULTY AND AI IS QUITE PRETTY, as I may say, or even NAAICE.

Graphic detail... The backgrounds are marvellous, especially if compared to latest games on PS2, that I played so far... Charas, even with lower poly count are looking much better, than in SC2. Some graphic details are especially pleasing, as of Setsuka's kimono, that is looking just as the real silk, or to say, Nightmare's armor and the overall light and shadows. And... Just lok on Taki, she's alive. No, really, even her thighs are moving like real, not mentioning boobs and butt. And for the texture detail, every shadow is in place, every line on clothes, they just used that less-than-500-mhz PS2 to create such things... Marvelous, especially compared to lack of graphic detail on Lara Croft in last Tomb Raider, PSOne technologies used in Onimusha Dawn of Dreams (no highlight at all) and overall poor representation of most recent games...

Cons are the deletion of SC2 Tekken-like modes, such as Team Battle or fully-potential survival. And statistics. Also I would likelso I would like to see the book and map again, prefferably like in the first Soul Blade/Edge...

About unbalanced sm-thing - I don't know, it entirely depends on the player, only the weak talk about "unfair play" if the conditions are presumed ok by the game (excluding when charas select weapons with or without bonuses)... Namco are doing good job, I got angry aat some developers for screwing the series with stupid plots and old graphics (like above mentioned Eidos with their two 128-bit era Tomb Raiders and the only two poor. Or Capcom, corrupting the whole legacy of Resident Evil with all post-Nemesis releases, not to mention Medal of Honor, Need For Speed, or some troubles with Squaresoft and FF movie). I really want to see when new Tekkens and Souls will be released, will they be as great as Tek5/SC3?

Martial art style?

Anyone know who were the motion capture actors for eastern weapons forms and moves? What style were they? I'm mostly interested in the straight sword and the staff. From the swift moves and strong emphasis on the blade/staff itself and strong acrobatics, I dare guess they are both from the external family. Any experts? -- Xiao jy 19:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Edit by User:Zero

Enough is enough. I have recently redirected the Chroniciles of the Sword page to this article. This series and the creation of its articles have been exceptionally inappropriate. I have removed the character section from the resulted merge, and will insert the relevant material in the main list of characters.

In the main section of the article, I have removed nosnense such as the biased statements pertaining to character strength. I've had these articles on my watchlist for a very long time and due to many subject areas, I have been unable to participate in the construction. This is ridiculous. Its time for clean-up. -Zero^Talk 04:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll be probably the only one to answer you, but in my opinion this is totally uncool. I'm in no way conformed with the merging, and will refrain from doing other proyects because I don't want my work go to waste like this. Thanks, much appreciated. (Johnny Master 05:37, 27 May 2006 (UTC)).

The name of the article is technically incorrect

All official documentation I have seen refers to the game as either "Soulcalibur III" or "SOULCALIBUR III", not "Soul Calibur III". This applies to the title of the game only, as the name of the sword within the game is still spelled with two separate words.

This is evidenced by both the game's manual and the official website - the title of the page clearly shows the game's title spelled out with one word. -- StarCreator (69.244.75.90 19:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC))

Does it really matter? Besides, it's from the soul series, and Soul Calibur is the name of the good sword, whilst Soul Edge is the name of the evil sword. Many websites put words together without underscores. Why don't you just create a redirect page?

He means the title of the page, not the address.

P.S. Soul Calibur 3 rocks!!! Dessydes

Looked st the SC3 manual today. It is (like I said) two words. The story goes that sword Soul Edge became evil after being in too many battles, it was destroyed, but it could never be fully destroyed, so shards of Soul Edge were used to create a sword to counter it. This sword was Soul Calibur. Dessydes

My bad, didn't see the top. Still think it's fine as is. Btw, what makes SC3 so unimportant? Dessydes

If the page is going to be kept as two words, all the redirects are now incorrect =\ --Tobz1000 14:06, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Changed all the redirects back to two words; at least, I think it was all of them. But for the record, 'Soulcalibur' (as the name of the game) is one word in both the second and third games (and probably the first), despite what most sources say. I think I'll correct the whole series' names at some point. (Alexlayer: next time you move a page, take care of the redirects yourself.) --Tobz1000 14:21, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Fifth Game?

Unless I'm missing something, isn't this the fourth game in the Soul series? I didn't edit it, since I'm not an expert on the series. Lizard Dude 03:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC) I went ahead and changed it. Lizard Dude 03:25, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Missing Character Class?

The part of the article that names the classes for created characters seems to be missing the "Sage" class. Should this be fixed? Psycho Kirby 22:13, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Name of game?

Last time I checked, 'Soulcalibur' is one word. I'm fairly sure this is at least true for this title in the series, and think the page(s) should be moved accordingly. --Tobz1000 19:23, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Page moved; still needs cleanup (changing of names). If anyone wants to change it back, could they first confirm that the name is two words.

Looks like it's been magicked back to "Soul Calibur". My DVD case says "Soulcalibur", though. --130.232.131.47 23:17, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Why are these articles being changed back? Pretty much all the people on the talk pages agree that it should be "Soulcalibur" —TigerK 69 01:11, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Pictures

The character pages have a grossly lopsided distribution and proportion of pictures. For example, Taki's character page is practically loaded with pictures, while Nightmare and Lizardman have no pictures on their character pages at all. Also, Tira and Talim's character page pictures are enormous, while Kilik's character page picture is so small, you need a magnifying glass to see it. All this desperately needs cleaning up.

Character Analysis

I think they are fine. There is barely any information in this article at all, and I am sure that most people who look up the game will want to know what kind of characters and what the story is. There is no balance in this article. It is all about mechanics and reception, and that isn't enough information. If someone wants to clean up the characters, thats ok, but deleting them would be a mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.228.218 (talk) 13:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Why have the character pages got this section? They are all opinionated and ramble on while not making any sense. They are absolutely un-encyclopedic and should be removed. Plus they are filled with unexplained jargon that shouldn't be on Wikipedia.

Here's one example of the awful writing on display - "His strength also lies on his high-damaging attacks and great BT game.". Full of jargon, opinionated and uses terrible grammar. BT game? does he attack you over the telephone? The person who wrote it thinks it makes sense but most people won't know what you are talking about, therefore it shouldn't be on Wiki. Wikipedia isn't a place to discuss character strategies. Move to StrategyWiki and simply link to it, it doesn't belong in an encyclopaedia. Mr.bonus 13:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Character Article Names

I have just moved all Soul Edge/Calibur character's articles to use the most commonly used name as the article title. After being part of a debate over Street Fighter character article names for over a month, the decision was in agreement of my proposal to use the most common name as the article title and not their full biographical name (this information belongs in the first sentence of the article itself). Please do not move the articles back as this was decided as the correct method for article names. Please see Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-12-21_Street_Fighter_character_articles and Talk:E. Honda for the resaoning. Thanks Mr.bonus 22:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:21017801.jpg

Image:21017801.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) 04:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

File Corruption on PS3 with virual memory cards

It DOES exist, I just experienced it myself on a 60GB US PS3. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.14.35.241 (talk) 21:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

There are plenty of sites detailing the corruption problem on PS2 memory cards. GameFAQs even has an FAQ about the problem which can be found here: http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/ps2/file/927089/40424 It's a serious omission not to include this flaw in the main article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.160.67 (talk) 03:48, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Glitches, errors and bugs shouldn't be mentioned unless they have some sort of notable coverage.--Megaman en m (talk) 14:53, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, file corruption (which sometimes even corrupts whole memory cards) is something that mustn't be left out, people could even send their games to Namco to get a fixed version (but only in Japan). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.97.165.215 (talk) 17:54, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not here to help you fix your broken games, unless you have a valid reason, it can't be added.--Megaman en m (talk) 21:27, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

gameplay section? reception section?

This article has some flaws such as why is the section about characters so long? And where is the gameplay section? And where is the reception?--Megaman en m (talk) 03:12, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

It's not just the complete lack of those sections. The "Overview" section only consists about the game's glitches. It is definitely not an overview. --Mgbenz (talk) 17:11, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

All Caps

I feel that fully capitalizing the title of the game in the infobox is unprofessional. Generally, even if text is stylized in all capital letters in published material, it is not in plain text. Bgibbs2 (talk) 21:00, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

That's how the title is written as by Namco in all official materials (including the official websites). In the manual too (I just checked). --Niemti (talk) 07:11, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Soulcalibur III. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060701123350/http://www.gamecriticsawards.com/win.html to http://www.gamecriticsawards.com/win.html

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) 13:25, 2 January 2018 (UTC)