User talk:ReyVGM

Archives

• Archive 1 (8-2023)

Thank you!

Thank you! By the way, this is a continuation of the topic of the same name that I accidentally posted on the archive talk page. Sorry that I split this up, but I didn't want to break the rules again. Now at least I know what archived talk pages are for! :) -- FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) 02:48, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, no prob. It's not a rule to archive your talk pages, but if they get too big, you can do it. ReyVGM (talk) 12:55, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Okay, good to know! At least I won't make that mistake again (hopefully). Thanks! -- FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) 16:50, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

What

I didn't make that edit lol 👍 Tyler 💬 ✏️ 🇨🇦 04:28, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

no wait I see what happened, I did make that edit 👍 Tyler 💬 ✏️ 🇨🇦 04:28, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the cleanup on the Daffy Duck article. I had reasons to believe the Game Boy version was also released in the US, but I can't prove it. Seems it was really only released in Europe. --Mugg1991 (talk) 23:29, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

I couldn't find any official info, but No-Intro lists the GB-only version as European. And I checked ebay and all the GB-only versions of the game are European too. So It's safe to assume it was an Euro-only release. The question is now, which was released first? Was it released in Europe as a GB-only game BEFORE the other versions or after? ReyVGM (talk) 23:43, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Please slow down with the edits before you barrel ahead

You've been making various edits across anything that flies through the recent changes tab as of late.

While I wouldn't mind doing that, said edits are of you making hasty big changes without doing research before I or some other person get to actually refine what they're writing about.

I didn't pay much mind to it, but lately it seems you've been Yosemite Samming through articles that were just made, or about to be refined and interrupting work that was about to be done.

I was doing preliminary work on my Rainbow Cotton article (which was delayed as I waited for news on the remaster), before you cut half of it as I was talking with another editor on what else to find. Putting everything on Prerelease pages creates a problem TVTropes has been fiddling with where everything except the main page has content. I added that description because other pages like Sonic '06 or Dizzy did so previously. It also explains why Rainbow's codebase is a disheveled nightmare (they changed a texture at the very last minute, forgot to delete or optimize textures, and missed their December release date just to okay pressing the discs as the game was finished on December 1st, a similar thing is on Sonic 3's proto page). There were disc comparisons in the Sonic CD page and that specific disc texture the Dreamcast uses is very rarely seen (none of the Cotton fandom knew about it before). This was stuff agreed upon well over a year in advance.

Not everyone uploads their article in one piece, they add a preliminary body before looking at what they have to add. If everyone did that, the wiki's workflow would be nightmarish full of uploading random files that may or may not be used in the next draft of their articles.

And please, while I get citing the wiki's rules and writing about how it doesn't apply may seem helpful, it adds a layer of formality that is very unwelcome to a lot of editors and makes this site feel like Wikipedia. Kindly avoid doing that and shouldering everything on OP.

Please, pleeeease slow down. I don't like feeling like I'm stepping on eggshells and having to overelaborate at the cost of quality, just to avoid getting reverted for a ostensible reason.

Chimes (talk) 14:32, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

If you don't want people modifying a work in progress article, add a WIP tag to it so people know you plan to continue work on it. A lot of times people create a "preliminary" articles and then never touch them again. Otherwise, it's fair game. Also, it's best if things are edited out early on before people spend a significant amount of time working on something that could eventually be removed. I don't know why you mention TVtropes because they don't have anything to do with this site as far as I know. As for citing the rules, what would you suggest then? A lot of people don't even know there's a list of "common things not add", posting that as the reason is only being helpful.

Out of the four examples you linked to, all edits were fair game.

• The original Puzzle Bobble article were combining two games from two different hardware. I did make a mistake with the Bubble Buster name since I forgot it was unreleased. But all the other changes were completely fair.

• Musya: I'm not sure if you know but when you romanize certain Japanese words, there's no exact English equivalent for them. So, both Musya and Musha are acceptable transliterations (similar thing to what happens with Yoshi. It can be written as Yossy or Yoshi). But, since it clearly says "Musya" in English in the title screens of both the Japanese and US versions, then there's no point in writing it as "musha" since the developer already decided that the transliteration they want to use is "Musya" not "Musha".

• Rainbow Cotton: I only edited the extremely long intro and the other part about comparing ingame art to the physical disc, I don't know what other pages have done, but comparing content to physical products has never been a thing on a game's page. But, you can always add that kind of stuff to the game's talk page or you can even create a Notes:Rainbow Cotton page. No one is saying the info is worthless.

• Marchen Adventure Cotton: I don't know why you used this game as an example. I only edited mentions of the PSX version since that version should get its own page.

ReyVGM (talk) 20:53, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Crystal Beans from Dungeon Explorer's Bob Dilemma

As far as i'm concerned, the only companies that should be listed as developers on a game's bob are companies that are

• expliticly labeled as developers on an official resource (e.g. company websites. game credits can also apply, but this can also be not true, especially for games based on licensed properties, which often credit the publisher or producer company(ies) instead)
• known to have done programming work (known via official resources or employee connections)

Birthday doesn't apply to any of these (they only did supervising and character designs), so it should not be listed in the bob of the Crystal Beans from Dungeon Explorer page; only Oersted should, as they are known to have done programming work
--Tikal. (talk) 17:01, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Hey Tikal. I don't agree with that because during that era, sometimes game credits would say "produced by" when crediting a developers. See these examples: Valis 4 (developed by Laser Soft, but credited as the producer), Black Hole Assault (developed by Micronet, but credited as a producer), Bomberman (developed by Hudson, credited as producer).

Also, developers aren't just the programmers. A company that develops graphics or music for a game is also a developer or co-developer. I really see no reason why companies that contributed to a game's production should be left out of the bob. In the case of Crystal Dungeon, it seems the game was outsourced to 3 different companies, and again, I see no reason why two of those companies should be left out. Who's to say that Birthday didn't also program the music? Maybe they composed and programmed it. Maybe a new entry should be created in the bob for co-developers? ReyVGM (talk) 20:53, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Don't erase Bubsy II page

Please don't erase Bubsy II page, the cheat codes wasn't published somewhere else, Sega retro only discovered these. Outfit7Gamer

Why do you have to lie? Sega Retro added these codes to their site almost 4 years ago, and even then, those cheats have been online on gamefaqs since at least 2018. Also, the codes were featured in 90s magazines. ReyVGM (talk) 04:36, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Oh I didn't knew that Outfit7Gamer

I restored the page because there is one cheat that qualifies as a debug cheat (the invincibility code), but you didn't add that one for some reason. Remember to sign your comments with four tildes like the red box above says. How you are currently signing is not really the proper way and it's actually harder for you to do. ReyVGM (talk) 05:41, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Please read ASAP!

Hi! A user finally found real proof on this discovery. That user has now been blocked, but I wanted to reach out to you and see if you think it's real (even though I'm 100% sure it is). If you think so, can you put it somewhere in the page? Thank you ever so much! I can help out if you want! -- FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) 02:58, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Why don't you join the discord and ask people there and see what they say? This is not the first time you've been 100% sure of something only to turn out to be wrong. ReyVGM (talk) 07:05, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

One problem...I have NO IDEA how to even use Discord. Have you looked at the talk page section itself yet? There's a LOT of solid proof there, and it's not based on sheer hope and vague detail like the things I've "found" before. Besides, it wasn't me who found the music; it was this user. If you haven't gone and looked at the talk page section, please go do so now; I've also contacted TetraFan1000 about this matter. If you still don't believe me, I will go on Discord and learn how to talk to people there, and maybe contact an admin about this if that doesn't work. -- FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) 20:40, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

You join the discord, you type words and you press Enter. That's how you use discord. ReyVGM (talk) 05:58, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Actually, the man who posted the youtube video (it's linked in the talk page section) has worked for Sega and he composed the video's music himself. His name is David Javelosa and he worked for Sega of America from 1989 to 1996. He worked on the music for Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine and Sonic Spinball (both the Game Gear and Mega Drive versions). He also composed music for the Sega Channel and the 1.0.0 North American Sega CD BIOS screen. If you need more proof that he worked for Sega, see his Sega Retro page. There is also an interview that seems to add context to the composed music in the video. And to top it all off, this user actually emailed David Javelosa for info on the music, and he got an email back saying that Javelosa would dig up both the cartridge and a Genesis and record footage of the cartridge in action and then send that user the footage. I confirmed this when I sent the same user a message about this on the Super Mario Wiki and got a response. The user was also sent a picture for proof that the cartridge did indeed exist. This is all facts, I promise you. Go look and see for yourself. This IS real, I am 100% sure, and we need to add this somewhere ASAP. I don't need to ask on Discord because the proof is right there. -- FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) 20:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

All of that info and pics can be faked. Not saying that it is, but until you have a dump of whatever it is you're exited about, then all you have is conjecture. I'm really not the person to talk to about this. Ask in the discord to see what others say.ReyVGM (talk) 05:58, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

All right, I'll try. FWI, it wasn't me who found the music. -- FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) 23:47, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I posted it under the Discoveries thread. I hope it's okay. You can keep tabs on it if you want. Thank you for your advice! -- FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) 23:53, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

All right, two different admins said that the find wouldn't be needed on TCRF, so the issue's resolved. Thank you for your suggestion, and I'm sorry for doubting you. I am deeply grateful for your help. Thank you. -- FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) 00:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, that info is better for a Sonic wiki ;) ReyVGM (talk) 04:03, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

True. I wish there was a Sonic wiki out there that wasn't run by Fandom. -- FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) 02:48, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Haunted Castle Revisited and Adventure ReBirth

In a recent edit of the Haunted Castle page, you said (with the key part highlighted):

"This is not like The Adventure Rebirth. HC Revisited is a faithful remake of the original."

I strongly disagree, as do many others on YouTube and elsewhere, and here's why:

• The gameplay, graphic style, and presentation is very similar to Adventure ReBirth.
• The levels are remixed from the source material and kind of go their own direction at times.
  (The "haunted monolith" part of the graveyard is a prime example.)
• Simon has a temporary "Thorn Whip" upgrade instead of a permanent sword upgrade.
  (Christopher got fireballs, much like in his original game.)
• They were both made by M2.

What more do you want? d:

~ Jo Li (U, T, C) 21:00, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

The engine certainly seems to be the same, but HCR is a remake of the original (remakes will often have new stuff the original doesn't have) whereas The Adventure Rebirth is literally a whole new game that reuses the story from the GB game, so HCR is not a "remake a'la Castlevania: The Adventure ReBirth." Does every new sequel or remake need to be updated to mention that it plays like the former and made by the same developer? Surely not. Us humans just love looking for connections and patterns. ReyVGM (talk) 21:32, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Pardon the intrusion, but let's put it like this: Haunted Castle Revisited is to Haunted Castle what AM2R is to Metroid II, and Adventure ReBirth is to Castlevania: The Adventure what Metroid: Samus Returns is to Metroid II. The former is being faithful to the source material while also carefully expanding on it, the latter is to make a new game very loosely-based on the vague memories people had of the original.

Case and point, in HCR the stage settings are kept the same as the original, the layout and enemy placement is the same as the original but expanded upon to better match the pace of a console Castlevania game, the bosses are the same as the original but with a modern flair, and the entire soundtrack is directly remixed from the original.

Now compare to Adventure ReBirth and besides having the word "Adventure" in the title, there's very little inheritend from the original into the new one (beyond a couple of enemies such as the rolling eyeball and the piranha plant-thingy): the stage settings in the original were whatever so they reinterpreted them as whatever they wanted (if at all), there's almost nothing of the original layouts being reused being mostly brand-new (the original was only 4 stages long, ReBirth is 6 stages long, do the math), none of the bosses were reimagined into something "modern" but outright replaced and added-in minibosses for good measure (because they made the stages too long now), and worst offender of all, literally all of the music is remixed from previous games except from Adventure (they did make a remix of the first stage theme "Battle of the Holy", but didn't put it in the game for some reason).

Of course these two games are kinda similar stylistically and "conceptually" (make a new version of a long-forgotten piece of the franchise), but they were clearly made with very different intentions so it's a false equivalence at best. --DeepWeeb (talk) 01:29, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, that's why the phrase "this game saw a complete remake a'la Castlevania: The Adventure ReBirth" is just not true because The Adventure Rebirth is not a remake, it's a whole new game. ReyVGM (talk) 03:15, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Uuugh. Alright. I concede on this one. There's a vast difference between a, well, rebirth of a game and a more-or-less straight remake. Though, DeepWeeb, I've got a more direct comparison for ya:

• Vampire Killer is to Castlevania as ReBirth is to Adventure

But...

• Chronicles is to Castlevania as Revisited is to Haunted Castle

(Geez, I hope I did that right...)

That's how I sees it, anyway. Cheers, y'all.

~ Jo Li (U, T, C) 17:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Uhmmm, I wouldn't be 100% sure on those examples either. Vampire Killer it's kind of a different game altogether despite of being a re-telling of Castlevania 1 (of which there are plently, more on that later), it only ever came out a month after the original and instead of a being a linear action-platformer it's more of a screen-by-screen semi-exploratory maze game (like many contemporary computer games), it reuses a lot of the NES graphics, layouts bosses, etc. It's not a "remake" so much as it's an "adaptation" to a different format (think Strider on arcade vs. Strider on NES)

Meanwhile, while I would have almost conceded the second example, looking closer at it wouldn't be so sure about Chronicles being all that faithful to Castlevania 1 either. Yes, the intro stage is 1:1 to the original with the "Vampire Killer" theme, but there are far more liberties than homages to the original: the only returning stages/bosses are the intro stage, the Medusa stage (which was moved from the 2nd stage to 4th, and completely redesigned layout) and the Grim Reaper stage (which mixes up the original with new bits, and does something extremely clever with the Axe Armor hallway). In reality it's more or less another Super Castlevania IV (which in Japan is just called Akumajou Dracula, just like the Famicom OG, the MSX2 game, arcade game, and the X68000 game), all rather standalone games that share the commonality of telling the story of Simon Beltmont's triumph over Dracula, the only actual follow-up to his story is Simon's Quest.

I think the only "true" remake the Castlevania series has had until Haunted Castle Revisited would have to be The Dracula X Chronicles: it's 95% identical to Rondo of Blood save for some extremely negligible differences and the expected visual overhaul.

So I propose:

• Super Castlevania IV and Chronicles are to Castlevania as ReBirth is to Adventure

But...

• The Dracula X Chronicles is to Rondo of Blood as Revisited is to Haunted Castle

--DeepWeeb (talk) 17:40, 31 August 2024 (UTC)