Talk:Phantasy Star IV

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Sega task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Melee (game terminology) (0 participants)
Solo leveling: Unlimited (2 participants)
Game Sack (3 participants)
Delibird (10 participants)
Godzilla: Monster of Monsters (4 participants; relisted)
Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (4 participants; relisted)
Araya (video game) (3 participants; relisted)
Chao (Sonic the Hedgehog) (7 participants; relisted)
Crazy Bus (11 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Names

Since this is the English language' version of Wikipedia, the English language names of the characters should be used. Keep the otaku Japanese purist nonsense off of these pages. Besides, why would anyone change the character names to their Japanese versions, but not the names of spells, monsters, places, etc? If you feel the need to "preserve" the original Japanese, then by all means, start or edit the Japanese article at http://ja.wikipedia.org. For this page, though, the English names will be used. Thank you. Godheval 07:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It boils down to this: the original release is always canon. Thus, Japanese names must come first here. If it was the other way around -- an article in the Japanese Wikipedia about an American game that had character names changed for the Japanese release, the American names would come first as well, localized version second.

Here's an example. The characters Syfo Dias and Count Dooku had their names slightly changed in the Brazilian release of the Star Wars movies (to avoid certain vulgar puns). But the Portuguese Wikipedia has their original names first, and the changed names as unimportant trivia. - Stormwatch 00:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When there is no official English release, you are correct that the original is "canon" rather than any fan-translations. However, an official translation wins because this is the English language encyclopedia, and therefore that is the name it will generally be known by from English audiences. There has been a wide consensus in favor of this. Yes, there are exceptions, and most of them probably shouldn't be exceptions. The rare times that the "originals" are used are when the official translation is widely ignored or minor, which isn't the case here. SnowFire 02:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The translations of the Phantasy Star series are regarded by fans as a massively inconsistent mess. That's another point for holding the original as canon. Not that it's necessary anyway. See, the original is always canon. Here's why: since a game (like any piece of fiction) is an alternate reality, the members of the developement team are the "gods" of this reality (like a book's writer, or a film's director). What they create is the "one true reality" of the game's fictional world.

A translator's job is to make it so those who can not speak the original's language have access to that fictional world. Anyone who deviates from that mission and makes changes beyond the strictly needed is but a corruptor of the original work. - Stormwatch 23:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh... I see that you're a purist. Unfortunately, "corrupting" the original is precisely the job that needs to be done. A deadly strict translation is quite frankly impossible since words have different senses in two languages, different connotations are rolled up into words, and so on. A strict translation for content may totally destroy puns and leave incomprehensible cultural references. More to the point, the English versions of Japanese names often don't necessarily have any closer bearing to reality. There have been many well-known times where the Japanese have screwed up writing the English names or terms they intended, or generally used stuff that sounds ridiculous in English (but fine to Japanese audiences). Let's face it: when you "translate" something, you are really writing your own new work based on the old work. There's just no way around it, though obviously there are degrees as to how far from the original you stray, but there's no such thing as a "perfect" translation. Call it a "localization" if you will. I'd recommend reading some Douglas Hofstadter, who is currently translating poetry right now and dealing with issues precisely like this.

Anyway. That was a side note on the general issue. The more pertinent issue as far as Wikipedia is concerned is that most English-speaking readers will know the localization's names and not know the Japanese version's names, regardless of whether the translation was bad or not. That's the real issue at stake, and flows from Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names) (use common names) and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English). Though it's intended for article titles, Wikipedia:Naming conflict is instructive: when tiebreaking for names, the criteria is what's in common use (the English names), the official names (again, the official translation), and the self-identification used (unknown what Sega prefers). So that would be 2-0 for English. If you really persist in this, can I recommend taking this to the talk page at WP:CVG and bringing it up there? SnowFire 00:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: Also, to be sure, adding the Japanese names at all is certainly good for the article. More information is always nice, so it's not like it's a defeat or something... people can still see the Japanese names, it's not like we're in favor of removing them. SnowFire 00:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's what I said: changing beyond the strictly needed. A literal translation won't work well. I know it, I have worked as a translator (nothing published, just Portuguese/English communications for the CCF). But again, when you change things that you don't have to change, the translator is corrupting the original work.

In this game, for example, it's acceptable to change Freyna to Demi, because there was a technical limitation (4-letter character names maximum). But it's just stupid to change Lyla to Alys. Not only there was no reason, it caused confusion too: people wondered if Alys was the Alis of the first Phantasy Star (actually Alisa, same 4-letter limit).

Rule of thumb, ask: why?. If there is no good reason for a change -- if the translator simply "felt like" giving characters new names, or if content was censored to change age ratings -- the localization is flawed. And still, no matter what, only the original release is canon -- unless following titles or remakes retcon the original. And no, translators can not retcon! - Stormwatch 14:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the English names should be the ones used here. The translation was official and immediate. The Japanese language version of Wikipedia should have the Japanese names. The English language version should have the English names. If the translation came 2 decades later(like FFIII), then I could understand it, but not on a game like this. The English version is far more well known in English speaking countries. I'm changing it. If you want to change it back, cite more than a Brazilian Star Wars page, cite an official Wikipedia policy. This article is about Phantasy Star IV, and the name alone means it's the English version. --Visual77 02:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the correct name is Phantasy Star: The End of the Millennium (as it appears in the title screen), not Phantasy Star IV (the name in the box). - Stormwatch 23:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are the only one who has ever made the edits to the Japanese name, when we have 3 in favor of English names. Go check Wikipedia's policies and find out how you are in the wrong. In the meantime, I'm alerting the admins. --Visual77 03:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is not yet any cause for administrative intervention. --InShaneee 04:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Godheval and SnowFire: *facepalm* This has NOTHING to do with being an otaku, you retards. It's simply about wanting to remain faithful to the intentions of the game's original creators (the game was made by the Japanese developers at SOJ, not by the translators at SOA) and rejecting the translation's changes due to its poor quality (not only the translations of these games were really poor made [shortening or changing sentences, using awkward dialogue, and changing plot elements for no reason at all], but they decided to change every character's name to a 4-letter one just because they couldn't be arsed to change the character limit for the characters' names). If the translation was decent and gave me the impression that the translators were competent, I would call the characters by the American names, in the same way I call Mega Man by his US name rather than Rockman. But alas the translation is awful and very lazily done, thus I refuse to use its crappy names. Sorry if that makes people like Stormwatch and me otakus to you (I don't even watch anime or read manga, btw). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.231.24.119 (talk) 19:29, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of Phantasy Star IV characters moved to gaming wiki=

The "List of Phantasy Star IV characters" page redirects to the Phantasy Star IV: The End of the Millennium page now because it was tagged to be moved to a gaming wiki. It was moved to the Encyclopedia Gamia and can be edited here. --Cs california 00:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Playstation 4 Confusion?.jpg

What will happen when in 4 years time somebody searches PS4 on wikipedia? 58.170.156.113 signing added by Struway2 (talk) 07:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC) when restoring deleted section[reply]

We'll cross that bridge when we come to it, i.e. create a disambig page for "PS4". For now, there is no other meaning, and so the disambig page doesn't need to exist. Playstation 4 is still a few years off, yet. Godheval (talk) 14:57, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS4 should not redirect here. Especially after all the information on the product which will be out next year. 213.198.95.66 (talk) 14:21, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Major Changes 7/22/2008

I made a number of changes to the article, mostly intended to clean it up.

Rewrote much of the story section, but kept the important details in tact
Removed the trivia section and integrated the content into the body of article
Placed Development History below gameplay, story, and characters, as these three things are probably more significant to people reading the article
Removed Wai Xing Zhan Shi section and placed the content into the new "Ports and Remakes" section of Development history. This is for better organization, and also because I do not feel that it deserves its own header section. It is a pirated and edited version of the game, afterall.
Added a "Reception" section
Added section "Series References and Homage to Other Sega Franchises" - where some of the previous trivia section was placed
Placed a number of sections that were once separate under Development History, since all of that information is related to development history. I did subdivide it into categories for ease of reading.
Attempted to remove all of the plot spoilers from the characters and story section, for the sake of those few gamers who may be new to the game. Wishful thinking that PSO and PSU will garner a new interest in the original series.

I did some other minor things as well that I can't remember, but all for the sake of improving the quality of the article. Godheval (talk) 16:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Box Art Change

I changed the box art originally because I mistaken took the European box art for Japanese somehow - my mistake - and I had been changing to the box art of English versions of the game as this is the English language Wikipedia. After a needless revert war with Megata Sanshiro, who pointed out my mistake, my new rationale for switching to the U.S. box art is that it is a higher quality image. I will not object to the use of the EU box art if a better quality version can be found. However, at that point, the change might seem spiteful, since either the U.S. or EU box art will suffice for this article. Godheval (talk) 14:20, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, the EU box art is slightly better in quality when I look at them both. I really don't care whether the EU or US box arts are used as both are an edition of the English language version of this game, but if you say the quality of the US version is higher, then I object. An appeal to you both, please stop this reverting. Leave it as it is.--Fogeltje (talk) 17:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then I think you may be missing something. The EU box art is replete with JPG dithering all along the left side and in random other spots. The U.S. version is near crystal clear with no evidence of pixelation or dithering or smudging, as is present in the EU version. As I said in my edit notes, I have no problem with the EU version being used at such a time when a higher quality version is found. The "revert war", as it were, was started by the other editor, who for no legitimate reason reverted my edit. —Godheval^{T C W} 13:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ps4

SHOULDN'T REDIRECT HERE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.100.201 (talk) 21:01, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And yet it does, and will continue to, until there is something else called "PS4" requiring a disambig page. Get over it. —Godheval^{T C W}

The search "PS4" should not redirect here because of the information that I have on the actual video game console. Do you actually think that someone searching for PS4, wants to see the SEGA game? Take a look at the page; you will be interested. My information is official, so it is not fictional, misleading text. Mike |talk 20:23, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no page for a new console by that name, at least none that I could find. So redirecting PS4 here is totally acceptable.--Fogeltje (talk) 22:46, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SEGA or Sega

I see there has been some minor edit-warring over the spelling of Sega. Manual of Style is pretty clear on this.

"Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner considers nonstandard formatting "official":
* avoid: REALTOR®, TIME, KISS * instead, use: Realtor, Time, Kiss

Please stop this senseless reverting.--Fogeltje (talk) 22:14, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Box art

I modified the blatantly incorrect bit about the cover art but it's still pretty much original research. (even if that research is as obvious as taking a single look at http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/genesis/image/563334.html) I tried finding a source on it but I figure nobody that's reliable source found it necessary to state the obvious. 145.99.155.53 (talk) 21:30, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Game is set AW 2284

What does AW mean?DellTG5 (talk) 21:41, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An unnecessarily specific detail. Nifboy (talk) 22:59, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Price tag notability

Per the history mode in Sega Genesis Collection PS4 was notable for its $100 price tag like V.R. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JasonHockeyGuy (talk • contribs) 07:38, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Composition

I think Masaki Nakagaki should be added (as well as Tokuhiko Uwabo possibly). Well "Bo" has worked on other games, he doesn't play much of a role here, but this is the only one "Gaki Chan" is known to have ever worked on whatsoever, and he contributes almost as much as "Ippo". So I don't think it's right to have merely the latter listed, but unsure if all three should be up. —juunannio 02:12, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Canceled Sega CD version (possible hoax)

I've just deleted the "Mega-CD version" sub-section from the article. This claim made everything dubious.

However, poor sales and lack of support for the Mega-CD platform caused a change of plans midway through development.

Phantasy Star: The End of the Millennium came out in Japan on December 1993. Sega was still supporting the Mega CD by that point and were released quite a few games for it in 1994 and 1995 (including Shining Force CD). In fact, their second-to-last Mega Drive game in Japan was the CD version of Shadowrun. So yeah, this story sounds like bull. Jonny2x4 (talk) 03:44, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. If anything, poor sales should have been a motivator for Sega to put the game on Sega CD, since the Phantasy Star games are system sellers. It really is a mystery why PS4 was released for the Genesis instead of the Sega CD. Besides the Sega CD's desperate need for more software, Sega had to spend a ton of money on the extra-large cart size, and even then the PS1-style 1st person dungeons had to be cut because there wasn't enough space, both problems which would have been solved by having the game on Sega CD. I'm surprised this article doesn't have an answer to that mystery yet; you'd think a game like Phantasy Star IV would have had more written about it.--Martin IIIa (talk) 13:04, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Recent revert

I have reverted editor 86.173.188.58's recent changes to the article. I realize that these changes include the addition of some sourced content; however, they also continue a long-standing tradition of IP address editors editing this article to replace "mixed reviews" with "positive reviews" and falsify the summaries of those reviews, adding in laudatory remarks that do not appear in the reviews and smoothing over or outright removing any criticisms. Note that though I say "IP address editors", these edits are similar enough that they are likely all the work of one editor using different IP addresses. Needless to say, this makes me look upon the addition of respected gaming magazines calling PS4 "undeniably one of the greatest RPGs ever fashioned" with more than a bit of suspicion. I tried to check up on the sources online but had no luck.

86.173.188.58's edit also includes some other unambiguously counter-productive and frankly inexplicable changes, such as falsifying the issue number for the GamePro review and replacing the "ref name" for one source with a name that is much more prone to being reused without being significantly shorter.

In sum, I lack the time and means to sort out which (if any) of 86.173.188.58's changes are worth keeping. If anyone else has access to the cited sources and can confirm or deny the accuracy of the changes, please do so.--Martin IIIa (talk) 20:25, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Phantasy Star IV: The End of the Millennium. 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/20170618040105/http://www.tor.com/2017/03/27/fighting-for-utopia-revisiting-classic-90s-rpg-phantasy-star-iv/ to http://www.tor.com/2017/03/27/fighting-for-utopia-revisiting-classic-90s-rpg-phantasy-star-iv/

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) 10:16, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Demi (Phantasy Star IV)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Demi (Phantasy Star IV) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 22 § Demi (Phantasy Star IV) until a consensus is reached.

Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 20:15, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Missing platforms

A recent change I made was just reverted, because "many Genesis games get re-released, not lead important". However, many other articles on video games list which platforms the game can be played on. This is helpful info for people interested in trying a new game. Why would we not add it back in? (talk) 21:10, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Kyra Tierney" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Kyra Tierney has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 14 § Kyra Tierney until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 16:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bestseller or commercial success?

Is this game supposed to be a bestseller and/or commercial success or neither? Why? Thomas Wiencek (talk) 02:53, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Hahn Mahlay" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Hahn Mahlay has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 29 § Hahn Mahlay until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]