Talk:Conker: Live & Reloaded/Archive 1

Archive 1

More Info

The info on the page isn't all that great. A character portion or plot overview seems in order. I'd do it myself, but I am way to unexperienced in Wikipedia to begin making whole new sections. --Von 09:03, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah

Does anyone eles think that the one for N64 was way better for multiplayer? Because i think the new one sucks only 2 players? crappy Jigsaw12 21:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

• Talk pages aren't for general discussion, only talk about changes to the article.
• Two players for the XBox one?Well,OMG...I thought it was like BFD...Yeah,it is crappy.The thing's f**ked up.

Merge Tediz into this?

I think they should be left separate, I intend to clean up the whole Conker section of wikipedia and have so far done Sneeker and Grunt (Conker). I will create articles for the rest of the classes and continue to extend and clean everything. Also if no-one has any objections, once I have finished with all the classes I will reduce the description of each class on this page because I feel they are too long winded here. --James086 12:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

For the 360?

Is Conker:Live & Reloaded playable for the 360?I mean,supportable for it?I wanted an XBox,but ended up with a 360,due to the fact that they don't sell the XBox where I live.So,please give me an exact answer.I need to know if I can play Live & Reloaded on my 360.I had Bad Fur Day,but I lost it.Is it supportable for the 360 in North America?Please give me an exact answer.I have Shadow the Hedgehog for XBox (Tried to play it on the 360) ,but it keeps saying "This original XBox game is not supportable"...AND THE "List of XBox Games Compatible with XBox 360" says it IS playable...Is it??Conker The Squirrel 20:39, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

yes it is backwards compatible Dappled Sage 21:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Wal-mart

Even in it's censored form, Wal-mart refused to sell the game

I bought my copy at a Walmart. Are you sure this is true? DSMeatte 23:52, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe the phrase that claims walmart's refusal is vandalism, I think i'll remove it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.187.122 (talk) 21:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Uncensored Version

The article says that an uncensored version is on The Rare site..Can you purchase an unedited version of the game? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Resiak (talk • contribs) 17:11, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

(UTC)N64128256 21:00 8 June 2007

Soundtrack

The soundtrack for this game was released in CD by Sumthing Distribution. It features most of the songs from the game (the Great Mighty Poo song is censored) and comes with a DVD with five more songs and a couple of videos and pictures. I think this release should be mentioned in the article, adding that the songs that aren't included on it are on the Rare website (featuring, as already mentioned in the article, the uncensored Great Mighty Poo song).BrowndRemastered (talk) 05:08, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Released in Japan?

Well, Conker's Pocket Tales and Conker's Bad Fur Day weren't released in Japan, and Nintendo owns the rights to all the Donkey Kong characters, which Nintendo is a Japanese-based company while Rare (who owns Conker) is a UK-based company. --PJ Pete

I think that might be it; only COnker himself was in that game.--24.0.122.109 (talk) 18:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)Anonymous

Merge?

Besides the multiplayer, development, and reception, this article doesn't really have terribly notable aspects. On top of this, the N64 game's article isn't very long, so having an article about the remake harms that article. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

No, it should not be merged with the CBFD article. however there could be a section noting the game with a link to this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.140.152 (talk) 20:56, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Why?

How come Conker:BFD/L&R
were rated "M" when Rare
planned it to be rated
"E"--or atleast a kids game?
Is there anyreason to that?
Or is it because they wanted
to make a humorous game other
than Banjo-Kazooie?

• Its because Bad Fur Day has some adult content Enigmatical 23:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

• Bad Fur Day and Live and reloaded were definitely NOT aimed at children. The jokes are adult (or aimed at teenagers) with lots of profanities and violence. Also children would not be expected to find the references to films, especially as many of the films are rated for adults. They may have originally planned for it to be a kiddie game but that got thrown out the window somewhere early along the line. --James086 12:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• You might be talking about Conkers quest that was aimed to be rated "E" but then became BFD and was aimed for "M" for Adults forviolence,sexual themes,gore,etc.--Gus the king (talk) 01:34, 11 February 2009 (UTC)Gus the king

Mbits

This game is a remake of Conker's Bad Fur Day that has 512 megabits, so this one has the same amount of megabits as the Nintendo 64 game. --PJ Pete

Does this matter? Dappled Sage 19:23, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Not to mention his logic is flawed. It's a completely different game in terms of the program. It uses completely different textures and sounds of higher quality. Liam Markham 21:04, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I doubt Conker N64 used a 512 megabit (64 megabyte) cartridge. That's how large Resident Evil 2 was, with full-motion pre-recorded videos copied off 2 playstation CDs! Conker has no pre-recorded videos, and thus wouldn't need that much space. (Heck, even Zelda 64 and Zelda Masks only used 32 megabytes.) - Theaveng (talk) 21:15, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

It is 512 megabit. The game uses MP3 files extensively for speech. It is a miracle they managed to fit everything into 64MB. This game has a LOT more data than your average Zelda 64. :p 92.23.150.120 (talk) 00:52, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Merging.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was merge into Conker's Bad Fur Day. -- APL (talk) 20:42, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

---

I don't see what the problem is. No one seems to care about the article, since the article hasn't been improved much at all since I tried to merge it.

And since it seems to be an issue, why is censorship important? I didn't ask you to prove it happened, I asked you to prove it was actually important or worth mentioning. "It was censored" is essentially all that needs saying once this article is merged. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:32, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I can't speak for the other editor that reverted the merge, but my problems with it were

1. Conker: Live & Reloaded is a distinct game from the original Conker, and therefore deserves its own article as much as any other reasonably successful video game from a major studio. As far as I can tell it's customary for games of this stature to get their own articles. I don't want to make a WP:OTHERSTUFF argument here, but I'm surprised that this one has been singled out as non-notable, in favor of a short paragraph in its predecessor's article.
2. The merge came out of the blue, then came out of the blue again after it was reverted by some other editor.

As for your specific question about the censorship section, it's point is to illustrate a surprising difference from the original. Again, as far as I can see that's relatively common in articles about remakes. Admittedly, now that I look at it, it's not very well done. If we decide to keep this as a distinct article I'll have a go at rewriting it to be a general discussion/description of ways the remake diverged from the original.

I'm not married to this article; It won't keep me up at night if it gets the axe. I reverted because I was surprised that it was being merged, and then it bothered me that it disappeared again without discussion after being reverted twice. APL (talk) 03:16, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps it could be mentioned, but notability doesn't matter if there's very little to say ABOUT the game's notability. Neither article could be called large by any definition, even combined, and to have them split is just focusing on making more bad articles and fewer good ones. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 04:43, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

"Notability doesn't matter if there's very little to say ABOUT the game's notability" is sort of a nonsensical thing to say. An encyclopedia describes notable topics. If you look up "Aardvark" on in Encyclopedia Britannica you don't get a treatise on why aardvarks are important. You get a description of aardvarks. APL (talk) 15:43, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, if no one else is going to chime in, I guess you can go for it. I disagree, but I won't revert it again. Instead I'll pull stuff from this article into the newly merged article so that C:LaR is more than just a footnote. This is a relatively high profile title, it would be bizarre not to cover it. APL (talk) 15:43, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

In response to this : I'm not at all sure what your problem with this article is. Many of the game articles on your user page under "Pages I've Created" contain less "assertion of notability" than this title.([1][2][3][4][5]) The single sentence I added last week about XBL stats is more of an "assertion of notability" than many game articles have.

I'm also not sure what you mean about a "Development" section. That has nothing to do with notability, is that a separate complaint?

Again, I am not a significant contributor to this article, But since no one else is going to chime in here, I really wish you'd articulate your complaints better, before attempting a merge a fourth time.

Notice that I have changed my mind about letting you do what you like here. This is because I understand you less now that you've tried to explain it to me again. It honestly seems to me that you've got some unexplained grudge against this game. That doesn't make sense to me, so I assume there's some sort of misunderstanding or miss-communication going on here. APL (talk) 05:11, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

On closer inspection of your user page, I notice that the articles you've worked on are overwhelmingly Nintendo related. I'll be disappointed if this is just a console rivalry thing. I don't even have an X-Box. In case you were wondering. APL (talk) 05:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Epic facepalm.

1. 0% of the articles you listed are remakes, or are suited for merging. The problem with THIS article is that it has no potential for expansion that wouldn't be redundant to another article's content.
2. Development has plenty to do with notability. An article is far more notable if it has information that shows the history of its creation. Duh.
3. Wow, seriously? I really hope you weren't planning for this to be a crowning achievement in your life, because bringing up "'da console warz" makes that basically impossible. No, I have no rivalry, I have a preference, not a bias. Facepalm. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:20, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

0) "Epic facepalm" Classy.

1) Notability standards are the same for all articles. You cannot remove content without discussion (Thrice!) for lack of notability, and then defend other content will less "assertion of notability". (I suppose you can, but it's irrational.) Besides, a couple of the ones I linked to are part of series. Minor games in a series are often presented as a single article until there is enough content for all of them.

2) I don't think you understand what "Notability" means in the WP context. If you do, then your communication skills are poor, because what you just described is not compatible with Wikipedia's concept of notability.

3) "I really hope you weren't planning for this to be a crowning achievement in your life" What a silly thing to say. I'm not even sure what you mean here. APL (talk) 20:18, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I actually see a similarity to CD-i games from The Legend of Zelda series. The three games have similar gameplay, development history, and reception. Especially reception. The only really notable difference between them is the stories. This is a similar case. This and Bad Fur Day have identical stories and gameplay; the difference between them would be development and maybe reception. Mr Hippie probably thinks that the development differences are negligible. Since this is a remake, and the two articles are currently at Start class, I'm inclined to lean toward merging, just so we can focus our efforts on improving an article rather than two articles. At some point in the future, when Bad Fur Day has reached Good Article status, there will likely be enough distinct information about Live and Reloaded that a split will be reasonable. Until then, I'd say put them together. Larrythefunkyferret (talk) 07:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. My thought was that there isn't that much overlap between the too, besides perhaps the plot synopsys, (Which this article is strangely lacking, anyway). But so long as the content is kept alive and the articles can be re-separated at some future date I don't mind an actual merge. (As opposed to simply removing the article and calling it a merge.)

As an aside, I'm surprised that this article (and by extension this discussion) has gotten so little attention, I was under the impression that these games Both on the N64 and the X-Box had acquired a sort of "Cult following". APL (talk) 20:18, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

OK, I've gone ahead and done it. Probably should have waited a little longer for more comments, but I've got time right now.

Resolved

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Something Stubid

Why did the company who made Live and Reloaded turn the cute little army squirrels in Bad Fur Day into ugly bushy-eybrowed freaks in Live and Reloaded? I mean, maybe it mat be better for everyone else. I'm only 10 and I beat Bad Fur Day. I Saw previews and videos of it, and so far, everything is better exept the design of the squirrels. Also, what species is Berri?

Wow just wow I edited your spelling. Dappled Sage 02:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

berris a squirrel i think63.166.254.137 01:19, 30 June 2007 (UTC)medayugiohman

She's a chipmunk. Alpheta (talk) 18:21, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Conker: Live & Reloaded. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rare-extreme.com/?section=conkerreload&page=conkerinterview.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:25, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Removal of voice cast on this and related articles

@Homechallenge55: The voice cast for this game can be found in the in-game credits and instruction manual, among other sources. I don't think you're being fair by outright removing them with no prior discussion or tagging with {{citation needed}}. That kind of editing is unhelpful and doesn't give editors who might stumble upon "citation needed" tags (or a talk page discussion mentioning removal) at some later point and decide to source them. -Vipz (talk) 05:23, 11 April 2022 (UTC)