Talk:Trauma Center: Under the Knife

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merger[edit]

  • What do you think about the merger?

U2 06:08, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yeah, two lines of info does not an article make.

Vidgmchtr 06:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Agreed. As a new member, I may have put the 'merger banner' up, but I cannot merge them. Otherwise, I would have by now. U2 21:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discontinued?![edit]

Why was this game discontinued? It seemed to have good reviews and I would like to know why the discontinued it in the U.S.

Chill out, dude. Seriously. Why the game was discontinued is noteworthy information to include, and a call for people who known this information is completely acceptable for a discussion board. It's precisely what the above user should have done. Now, there may be more fruitful places to learn that information so that it can be added, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be asked here. (Often times people knowledgeable about a topic don't know what others would be interested in.) I noticed you overlooked a topic that actually doesn't belong on Wikipedia, the one above about how to beat a certain mission. Odd. MrVoluntarist 15:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There. Better? Now, regarding the game discontinued state and his question, my response was standard for a topic such as his/hers brought up here. I was under the impression that Talk pages were for discussion of the content in the article and changes made/to be made to it. If this person was requesting that information about the game's discontinuing be added to the article, I would have let it go. Otherwise, redirecting the person to a proper place to ask for more information should be the right thing to do here.
Well, unsigned Ivan, Gamefaqs might be an additional place deserving of this question, but here is also an appropriate place to ask. You apparently have no problem with people asking for information that would be relevant for the article, but apparently, they have to say some magic words. "Why was this game discontinued?" is, apparently, unacceptable, but "Hey, it would help the article if we included why the game was discontinued. Does anyone know?" is acceptable. Again, you really need to chill out. MrVoluntarist 13:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is an ATLUS game. ATLUS is renowned for having a very limited first print run, maybe a second print if the demand is high enough, but soon enough their games gets discontinued and will never be seen again.

Is the game really discontinued? I just bought the game new last week?

It could be that the game had another reprint due to demand, or the information about it being discontinued is incorrect/outdated.

The game is discontinued; the only way to find the game new is if a store still had copies of new versions of the game left or by buying it new online. As for WHY it was discontinued, I would suggest doing research on it yourself. But just so you know, finding information on why games are cancelled/discontinued isn't as easy as it sounds. In any case, the announcement of a sequel on the Wii might be enough to bring this back on the market.

Finally, I suggest you look at who made it and look at how many of their games have been discontinued... --Trance 21:44, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mrvouluntarist, it is you who needs to chill, its not a big deal, the topic does need information on why it was discontinued since i was brought here wondering the same, but otherwise, I heard a simple rumor that it was discontinued because of medical terrorism.Milldog 93 05:17, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nihongo templates on the name[edit]

Could somebody please put the {{nihongo}} templates and original Japanese names for the characters into the article? They differ quite a bit from the English ones. Derek Stiles, for instance, was originally named Tsukimori Kōsuke[1], and Victor's name was Aragaki. The Japanese names can be found at the Second Opinion Japanese site. Thank you very much to anyone willing to take on this task. --tjstrf talk 07:50, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph of Questions[edit]

Currently, there is a dispute between myself and Nubula over this paragraph.

"In the game's conclusion, there were questions raised about Adam which went unanswered, such as: How did he end up in his undead/disease-elemental state? What exactly is his final virus, "Bliss" and how were the other GUILT strains created inside him? Another question is where the voice, that claimed to be his, really came from as Nurse Angie realized that he wasn't the one talking. These questions were not answered in the remake."

I don't think it belongs in the article, per WP:NOT. Nubula does, and has stated that he will continue to revert. I don't particularly want to have an edit war, so I'm asking for opinions here, in an effort to build consensus. Anyone? Geoff B 21:39, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give one good reason why it should be deleted and please stop linking to that article, just come out and say what you mean. Nubula 11:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can give more than one. And I'll link to whatever I please. I believe the section as it is falls under both WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NOT#INFO. Perhaps if it was substantially changed, it might be suitable for inclusion somewhere else in the article, but at the moment it is stylistically bad and in the wrong section (at best). At the moment, I don't think it belongs in the article at all. Why the conclusion of the game is mentioned in a character profile (and not in, say, the Story section) is beyond me. Geoff B 12:27, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It does not fall under the WP:CRYSTALbecause it is not unverifiable speculation. Also its not the conclusion of the game, their points made in the game. Secondly if information about the character does not belong in the character section where does it belong? Also your claim that its stylisticaly bad is a personal opinion. Nubula 12:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That paragraph as it is written definitely is not encyclopedic information - it's loaded with what can be taken as personal bias (specifically, one that implies that there were huge plot holes that should have been filled in the Wii version but weren't, and thus made the game unenjoyable from the writer's POV, at least as I read that paragraph) which is definitely not good for inclusion. Restating it in a method that is encyclopedic is possible: for example, a line could reasonably be added under Adam's character description along the terms of "How Adam came to the hospital or how he was infected is not answered by the game. How he exactly communicates with the other characters is also not fully known." which gets the point of the paragraph across without loading the statements with bias. --Masem 14:01, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Then the question is not whether or not they should be included but a question of wording. Nubula 15:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But even if you worded it correctly and made it a separate paragraph, either it's going to come out with some bias wording for the paragraph to read well into the overall article structure (that is, I can't think of any leading sentence to start a paragraph about what questions aren't answered without intoning an unsourced bias, or the resulting paragraph is going to feel awkward. That's why, if these absolutely need to be included, they should be under Adam's character description, which then removes the need for a lead-off statement, not as a plot paragraph or anywhere else.
Note that because of the difficulty in talking about these topics without hinting at some bias(*), I'm prone to not include them, but if they have to be included, please consider the above. (*)However, if that bias can be backed by concerns from a qualified review that too many questions were left about Adam, then there's a way to write this with cited references. I'm just not aware of any major outlet review that seemed to get into the issue of these plot holes. --Masem 16:11, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It can't come out as bias if it happens to be true. There where plot threads concerning and statments made by Adam which where left unanswered, whether deliberately or accidentally, and correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it already under Adam's character description unless you mean the list of characters rather than this particular page. Nubula 17:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, as an example of what I mean, I took that paragraph that was in Adam's section and incorporated the details better with the existing text, as to unbias the (lack of) information. --Masem 18:06, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seems fine to me. Nubula 18:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

reflect the two letters of the console[edit]

Doesent the main carrecter name reflect the two letters of the console???? Derek Stiles DS —The preceding unsigned comment was added by HeatGuyRed (talk • contribs) 21:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

If you mean, is it an intentional reference, then there's no way to know without a source. Geoff B 22:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It can probably considered intentional since in the Wii remake (second opinion), they went as far as to call the new doctor Weaver, or, "Wiiver". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.78.84.7 (talk) 18:43, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stiles sounds like stylus! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.105.230.102 (talk) 21:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Guess...[edit]

Is that BLISS is like what's in Doctor Who, the recent New York episode. THOMASNATOR 09:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bliss isn't actually anything--it was a line Adam stated in the DS version that lead to quite a few misconceptions. The line is altered in Second Opinion, ret-conning Bliss out of the series. No actual proof exists that Bliss is actually a GUILT strain; however, there is proof against it. 1) Every single strain of GUILT was named after a greek day of the week. Of course I understand that there are only 7 days in the week, and thus they are limited--however, the entire theming doesn't tie in with the inclusion of "Bliss." 2) The supposed proof behind Bliss is that it is Adam's body--however, the X-missions were devoted to removing the GUILT from Adam's body, their source, which was said to be contaminated with every strain of GUILT. As Bliss wasn't the "X-8" mission, this further proves that Bliss, as a GUILT strain, does not exist. 3) Mention was made that the Z-cells cultivated from Adam's body were Bliss. Such is not the case, as the Z-cells, tissues from Adam's body, only produce combinations of GUILT strains, not new ones. This further proves that Adam's body as a whole is a breeding ground for the GUILT strains--it is NOT a "new" form of GUILT itself. 4) In Trauma Center: Under the Knife 2, the final GUILT Aletheia can only "attack" by summoning other GUILT. The argument goes that if Aletheia can be considered a new strain, so should Bliss. However, one must note that Aletheia isn't simply a collection of previous GUILT--it has its own distinguishing characteristics as well as self-defense moves.24.228.50.83 (talk) 05:19, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Visual Novel?[edit]

Perhaps I don't understand, but I don't see how this game could be classified as a visual novel. Visual novels are highly story based, when this game is simulation driven. It would seem almost like calling certain RPGs or Puyo Puyo visual novels. Ace Attorney is more of a visual novel, as it really only has the player guess how the story should progress. Before anyone mentions it, I know the story is presented much like a visual novel. However, I don't think that is good enough to classify it. The way it is presented keeps it simple enough while being very detailed at the same time. They obviously didn't want to slack off with the story or else it would just be a simple simulation without the drama inside and outsite of the operating room. --74.194.118.203 (talk) 21:44, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Trauma Center: Under the Knife. 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:

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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:31, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Trauma Center: Under the Knife/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Alexandra IDV (talk · contribs) 22:55, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do this one!--AlexandraIDV 22:55, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

  • Seems fine

Lead

  • "DS" as a shorthand for "Nintendo DS" is obvious and doesn't need to be introduced in parentheses like that (and "Nintendo DS" is not very long in the first place - consider whether it is even worth shortening it). Same for when you introduce it again in the gameplay section.
  • Is there any reason we're not mentioning the (main) genre in the lead sentence?
  • Uncurable diseases can already be treated - the two are not synonyms.
  • Would recommend briefly mentioning what reviewers liked/disliked about the game
  • Would consider describing Derek as "a surgeon" rather than "a man".
  • In the note, for the JP title, you give "Chōshittō Caduceus" as the title, which is fine, but I would recommend also adding "Chōshittō Kadukeusu" as the Hepburn romanization as it is spelled differently and shows the native JP pronunciation of Caduceus

Gameplay

  • using static scenes, character portraits, and text with rare voice clips. - am I to interpret this as meaning that the text sometimes, but not always, is accompanied by voice acting?
  • Otherwise this seems fine

Synopsis

  • Stile's - his name is Stiles, not Stile, right?
  • Relatedly, you sometimes refer to him by his surname and sometimes by first name
  • Otherwise, this seems fine

Development

  • When you introduce the acronym RPG, consider writing out "role-playing game" in full to make it clearer to readers unfamiliar with the term
  • You should mention that ER and Chicago Hope are television series specifically - one could otherwise get the impression that they are lines of surgeon sims

Release

  • CERO ratings aren't named after the age recommendation, so change "12" to 12 years and up, without quotation marks
  • The game was instead published by Nintendo of Europe.[12][23] It was released in Europe on April 28, 2006. - these can be combined into a single sentence

Legacy

  • Looks fine

References

  • Looks fine - RSs, and some use of interviews/primary sources

Images

  • Both seem fine

Notes that are not part of the GA criteria'

  • Consider adding alt text to all images to aid readers with impaired vision
  • Ref formatting is inconsistent, with some websites written in italics and some not.
  • We don't usually link to multiple official websites for different regions - but if you do want to keep them both, I would suggest grouping them together and not putting Mobygames in the middle

Looks good! I will put this on hold for the standard seven days; ping me when you are done or if you have any questions.--AlexandraIDV 00:57, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexandra IDV: I think I've addressed all the points above. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:57, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
All right, I think it's ready for GA! I will go ahead and promote it now~--AlexandraIDV 13:53, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Trauma_Center:_Under_the_Knife&oldid=1210180651"