Talk:For Honor

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2019 and 5 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): CommunityBear.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:22, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wu Lin

I removed the tag for Wu Lin in the beginning of the article, as it redirects to an animated film and there is no relevant article on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.191.15.34 (talk) 23:38, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Inaccuracies

Moved from User talk:AdrianGamer § For Honor

AdrianGamer Wiki pages should be about information as accurate as possible, if any media mentions or uses references from any area which exists in real life, then those information should be evaluated because they hold water, for example; in this game they use Vikings as one of their armies, this is not make-believe so if they use facts from history, they should take criticisms if any arises, if you feel like it doesn't apply to this game, then you are acting in a bias way towards the game developers, not only is this wrong, it also misinforms the game's players as to what the Vikings actually looked like (or what history has taught us what they might have looked like) by creating this wiki page, you have made an agreement not to be bias and take evidence where-ever it lays, if you say that this does not apply to the game itself, then add information instead of writing 'Pretentious nitpickery' as this shows blatant disregard to wiki's intentions to publish true information and to the people who want to learn, either stick to wiki rules or you will be reported — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hogyncymru (talk • contribs) 15:24, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

@Hogyncymru: they should take criticisms if any arises - If there are criticism, this can be added. I don't mind, as long as it is not an independent criticism section, and is talking about the game instead of all these history stuff. But there isn't any. It isn't our responsibility to cover the truth, our responsibility is to cover what the sources says. Verifiability is more important than truth. The "Pretentious nitpickery" heading was not written by me. It was written by an IP. Currently there is no source claiming that there are inaccuracies, and claiming that it has is original research, which is a Wikipedia policy that everyone should follow. AdrianGamer (talk) 16:00, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

@AdrianGamer: they use 'viking' as their source, that's all you need, if they called them something else, then this conversation would not happen, my edits will remain but, because you want things differently, I'll mention more about the connection, i'm sure neither of us want this to go further, so that's the compromise, I hope that will settle our disagreements.

@Hogyncymru: - No, we need to have sources that say "For Honor has inaccuracies". Without that, everything there is original research. And to be honest, this is a fantasy game. The game's basic premise is absolutely not based on history. Apollyon manipulating the three factions, Vikings attack Samurai and fight with the Knight? I don't know why we need a section to talk about Viking not wearing a helmet. AdrianGamer (talk) 16:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

@AdrianGamer: Hey, I iunderstand where your coming from, 'game equals make-believe', I get that, what I'm conserned about is the use of the name 'Viking', they used a real reference and then twisted it, therefore no longer becomes Viking, that is why I mentioned that there is a difference between game and reality, nobody is saying there is inaccuracies in the gameplay itself, all I'm saying is, there were inaccuracies in the research of what a Viking looks like from an artistic point of view, I'm not taking anything away from the game itself, I'm only pointing out that there is hard evidence to support that this make-believe vision of Vikings has been used for over 150 years and it is this that I'm referring to, please see what I see, I cannot make this any more clear, thanks

Extended content

==Innacuracies from using vikings as a reference for the game== In the game the Vikings wear horned helmets, as far as the real Vikings is concerned, there are no evidence that any Viking warrior wore a horned helmet and there is significant evidence that they didn’t wear such impractical headgear, In depictions dating from the Viking age—between the eighth and 11th centuries warriors appear either bareheaded or clad in simple helmets likely made of either iron or leather. And despite years of searching, archaeologists have yet to uncover a Viking-era helmet embellished with horns. In fact, only one complete helmet that can definitively be called “Viking” has turned up. Discovered in 1943 on Gjermundbu farm in Norway, the 10th-century artifact has a rounded iron cap, a guard around the eyes and nose, and no horns to speak of, yet the only helmet with horns found in Europe was the Waterloo Helmet, which is a pre-Roman Celtic bronze ceremonial horned helmet with repoussé decoration in the La Tène style, dating to circa 150–50 BC. The reason horns exist in today's media is because it entered popular culture and imagination in the 19th century when writers and artists began depicting the Scandinavian marauders wearing them. The roots of the stereotype may be when Gustav Malmström, a Swedish artist, and Wagner’s opera costume designer Carl Emil Doepler both depicted Vikings in horned helmets.

Unless a source chooses to write about the connection between this game and inaccuracies in the depiction of vikings, it is not within the scope of this article. As for your larger concerns, our job is to present the sources, not to find the truth. I think you'll find this link an interesting read.  czar 17:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

The removed paragraph seems to be an essay about how the depiction of vikings in modern popular culture and media is inaccurate, in general. It is not specific to this game in particular. As such, consider improving Vikings#Common_misconceptions rather than pasting this essay on any article that has to do with vikings. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:04, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

czar hmm, sounds like a strange rule to me, not talking about subjects relating to a piece of media, are you sure we are on the same page here? what about articles that mention games/films/stories/music etc relating to an actual event? can't it work both ways? so what you're saying is, you can talk about fictional vikings but you can't talk about factual vikings.. got you ;) .. also, if you read the article you supplied,you would see a great debate going on in the comments section contradicting your argument, wiki pages that sport a one sided argument proves that Wiki is not a reliable source of information. thanks for providing that link, the comments really did teach me alot about the flaws of that article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hogyncymru (talk • contribs) 19:43, 17 June 2016

Find a reliable source that discusses the inaccurate depiction/reference of vikings in For Honor. Until then, the content you provided is, as stated above, original research. – Rhain ☔ 23:59, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Conqueror

Why are hero’s getting free bashes and other heroes having to pay for it through feats?? Some can’t be free and some take up a slot make all free and give a decent lvl 2 feat to the characters… 86.19.179.45 (talk) 21:10, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Fighting Game

My concern with For Honor being labeled a “fighting game” is that while there is little else to it but combat, the actual gameplay is so far removed from what any other fighting game is that it seems misleading to label it as such. Having played it myself, it feels more akin to something like Star Wars Battlefront than any fighting game. ShteeK (talk) 15:16, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

isnt this a bit ridiculous? anyone who is a long term player would call it a fighting game. some players only play brawl, some of the most important competitive scene matches are in duels or brawls which have nothing but fighting game mechanics. its only ranked mode is in duels. itsits combat mechanics are light attacks, heavy attacks, blocks, parries, active guarding, guard breaks, throws, bashes, tr, dodge frames, superior blocks, hyper armour, it has a rock paper scissors of moves that beat others, it has specific reactable and unreactable windows. its in every essence a 3d fighting game with a gamemode that possesses the very most barebones MOBA elements. the wikipedia list of fighting games includes boxing management games, what precludes for honor from being a fighting game and instead being an action game? multiple secondary news sources cite it as a 3D fighting game.aps 81.107.48.13 (talk) 05:55, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Purchase

You guys did not tell me I had to earn a skin when that cost 25000 chips and I just spent 12 dollars why would you do that make zero sense 2600:1004:B174:6DFE:FC26:6A9C:3F20:40A4 (talk) 15:52, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Orochi

I HATE OROCHI LIGHT SPAMMERS I HATE OROCHI LIGHT SPAMMERS 2001:1970:525C:2100:E1E5:1434:C1EE:485 (talk) 23:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)