Talk:Star Wars: The Force Unleashed/Archive 1

Deletion

Two articles existed for this game. The first one was in existence since sometime in 2006, but the title wasn't correct ("Star Wars: Force Unleashed") and the other was created a few days ago at the proper title. I deleted the newer version since it had far less information and far fewer edits and moved the older page here and tried to merge.

Just FYI. K1Bond007 04:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, that's completely fine with me...I just want to make sure the info is right! :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 21:05, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

References and Sources

We are in major need of references and sources. There is only one source: gamespot.com for the systems it is coming out on. KdogDS 22:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree, but can I use Game Informer as a source (There latest issue has a 4 page preview article all about the Star Wars: The Force Unleashed)? :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 22:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

And if I could it would make a huge enhancement to the article! :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 23:16, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Felucia/Naboo

The concept art featuring a star destroyer entering the atmosphere of the planet... the bullet in the article lists it as Felucia, but I'm pretty sure that's actually Naboo. Felucia is largely a jungle world. The structures in the picture are quite Naboo-esque. TheInnkeeper 16:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

It appears that the two parts are unrelated. The bullet refers to the game demo, not the concept art present in the article. Either the terms are mixed up, or they are two separate things. Perhaps the original author should revise the article to remove such confusion.Prottoss89 23:09, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Release Date

This essentially states that the release date has been changed to Q2 2008. http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/starwars2007/news.html?sid=6167058&mode=news

I'll do the honors.

It would be nice if people stopped posting Amazon's release date as the release date as the release date has not been announced by lucas arts and repeating Amazon's speculation is not what wikipedia is for 80.7.7.224 (talk) 01:35, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Version Difference

This section has no sources, is extremely poorly written and seems to be NPOV while simultaneously not having any point. It also has several sub-headings with no information. Unless someone can edit this or find a source regarding differences across platforms and put that information in here I'm going to just get rid of the whole section until more information is released. Freethought69 00:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Have deleted the section. Freethought69 02:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

"Technology Utilized"

This section

According to Lucasarts, the next generation versions of the game will utilized DMM and Euphoria technology. DMM is a program that causes materials to act in the game world as they would in the real world, and is simulation based rather than program based. Euphoria is a program that gives all charactors a nervous system, causing tham to act realistically. Ex: You pick up 2 stormtroopers with the force and throw them around. They will try to grab onto anything to save themselves. It is also simulation based. This technology is only available to Lucasarts.

seems a little ridiculous. Proof, please? 152.23.196.162 06:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC) Sorry about not sourcing. I read that in Game informer on their article on force Unleashed, but also saw a video on ign.com.Eljawa 03:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Demo of Euphoria can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVpLWnF3MWA

Demo of DMM can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4EF9IkhAOo Mloren 08:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Not just a game

The Force Unleashed is not just a game, but a massive multimedia project consisting of the game, a novel, a comic, a reference book and an RPG supplement. But the article doesn't even mention any of those. Why doesn't it? see Wookieepedia:Star Wars: The Force Unleashed for more info about it. 151.203.186.245 18:59, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and added some of the info. 151.203.186.245 19:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

PS3 and Xbox 360

I think by Next Gen consoles it means the PS3 and the Xbox 360. The Wii obviously can't support it. Look at Fracture it is on the Xbox 360 and the PS3. 70.227.42.135 23:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Next gen consoles means ALL of the current next-gen consoles, including the Wii. It's listed on GameSpot as coming for the Wii. http://www.gamespot.com/wii/action/starwars2007/index.html?tag=result;title;2 AlexDP-Juve 23:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

It is coming out for the wii

It has been noted that it is coming out for the wii, ps2, and xbox —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.138.24.233 (talk) 09:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

The official site lists the Wii nowhere.

I'd imagine it would be on wii, but not xbox. They've already ported the game to the DS which is nintendo, so why not the wii?--Kondrayus 14:48, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

PC Release?

The information section of this article lists PC amongst the other platforms it is coming out for. I have not seen any listings for it coming out on PC. Does anyone know otherwise? If not then that should probably be removed, it's confusing and gets people's hopes up. I personally would LOVE for it to come out on PC as i'm not much of a console fan, but this is the only place I've seen that mentioned thus far. Anon user, unknown time.

LucasArts have confirmed it's not coming out on PC.

/me Waves fist as LucasArts. 80.177.28.141 13:59, 1 July 2007 (UTC)Arkady80.177.28.141 13:59, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Can you provide a reference for that? I did a quick search and couldn't find anything. BTW, there's a big difference between Lucasarts not announcing a PC release and Lucasarts confirming that it won't be released for the PC Nil Einne 16:16, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Vader's apprentice

If this game is from Vader's apprentice's view,then how come in the trailer I see him killing Imperial Stormtroopers? Clonetroop125 21:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

To quote from the Wookieepedia article for Vader's Apprentice (see here): "His existence was considered such a secret that he would make a point of leaving few witnesses to his work, even Imperial ones like stormtroopers". In other words, he kills stormtroopers because no one is suppose to know he exists, so he kills them to keep his secret. 70.17.131.82 22:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

• Ok thanks,and if you did not see the trailer yet, watch it here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obOowrOSkgA. Clonetroop125 23:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Besides that, Vader's apprentice should be killing Storm Troopers and especially generals and the like if he's learnt properly from his master... Nil Einne 16:12, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I am curious as to how they are going to explain what happened to the characters prior to Star Wars: A New Hope. I'm sure the creators already have a story line set out and left the end of the game open for future installments. But, if they had to "off" the secret apprentice to make way for The New Hope I think it would be awesome if the final bout was to the death against Master Yoda. -Jack, 7 November 2007

Yoda was in hiding, There would have been mention of him later if he had ever been discovered, I imagine some accident or mission gone wrong. Possibly even being killed by the Emperor in secret as a threat to his power? One of the Emperor's Hands vs. Vader's Apprentice?204.117.158.97 (talk) 15:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

This is not a forum to discuss things this is where you talk about adding to the article

Please sign your posts, especially if you're going to be complaining about policy violations. Xenocidic (talk) 15:50, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

PS2

Will the PS2 version have all the effects (like DMM & Euphoria) of the PS3 version? Clonetroop125 23:23, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

-This is a "seventh generation" console game. Most likely there will not be a Ps2 version. I honestly believe the Ps2 version will be scrapped before release. Especially since it is not being released until Q2 (Spring) of 2008. I seriously doubt they would go through the trouble of toning down the game enough and formating a game for Blu-ray PS format and DVD PS format just to have a Ps2 version available. Profit-wise, it would be wisest to focus on "next-gen" (technically current gen) consoles. -Jack, 7 November 2007

Platforms

There is a similar comment posted above. An interview with the designers said that the game will be for PS3, Xbox 360, PS2, PSP, and DS. I know that the Wii has more graphical power than the PS2 and was wondering if anyone knew if the game was going to be for Wii or not, and if so, please add it to the launch platforms.--Dark Grievous 22:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

If they already took the time to port it to Nintendo's DS, then I'd imagine they'd take time to port it to the Wii.--Kondrayus 14:49, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I have seen several danish sites there you can preorder the game for the Wii, so I have added Wii to the list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Necrope (talk • contribs)

LucasArts does not list the Wii as a platform. Until a reliable source offers up this info., it should not be added. --EEMeltonIV 21:52, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

The game is rumored to be ported to the Wii sometime after it's release if a Wii version doesn't launch along side the PS3 and Xbox 360 version.--Kondrayus (talk) 15:24, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Vader's voice.

In the trailer, is Darth Vader voiced by James Earl Jones or is it a sound-alike? JesseMeza 20:34, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Sounded like a sound-alike to me, but doesn't seem necessary to add whether if it's him or not. Acetaminophen

Apparently, Vader is being voiced by Matt Sloan, the voice of Chad Vader. 71.231.165.161 (talk) 20:17, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Apprentice's name

The apprentice's name "Dreb Fiadrok" hasn't been confirmed by any official source and I can't find it anywhere. I'm deleting it until this has been confirmed.

Wii version

You almost got me dancing around on the streets, but I checked Gamespot and IGN, there is no Wii version. In fact, it's being developed for every other major home and handheld console than Wii and Xbox. I'm deleting that information. Acetaminophen

If it's coming out for the PS2, I'd hope it's coming out for Wii. The Wii's graphical power is far greater than the PS2's. And they've already sent the game to nintendo for the DS. Although I really want it to come out for the Wii.--Kondrayus 22:00, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I can't believe they're not doing a Wii version - the Wiimote would be perfect for a lightsaber...--Hobmcd 10:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

No one said that they were not doing a wii version. Keep in mind, the game doesn't come out until next year. That's pleanty of time to port it to the Wii.--Kondrayus 20:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Wii Version Confirmed

computerandvideogames.com has confirmed a Wii version of Star Wars: The Force Unleashed. This version also contains an exclusive "duel mode" where players can compete head-to-head with their friends.

http://computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=172278 —Preceding unsigned comment added by EVIL-C44 (talk • contribs) 19:22, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Swforce.png

Image:Swforce.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:03, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Swforce.png

Image:Swforce.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The PSP version

The PSP version is going to have exclusive content, just check out this trailer that came in star wars battlefront renegade squadron: http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/123642.html?playlist=featured could someone post this? Here is an article summarizing the video: http://www.pocketgamer.co.uk/r/PSP/Star+Wars:+The+Force+Unleashed/news.asp?c=4295 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.131.99.167 (talk) 00:01, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Remove merchandise section

As this is more of a video game article, I think that the merchandise sections should be either deleted entirely (not enough info), or moved to its own article (which still may be difficult due to the lack of significant info). Since the info about the merchandise is scarce and some of it resembles speculation at best, I think I'll delete it, but I'll wait a day or two for consensus to decide what action to take. Comandante42 (talk) 00:37, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I've decided to delete the merchandise section unless told otherwise on Friday, Dec. 7, around 22:00 UTC or possibly sooner, since it is almost completely irrelevant to the video game which forms the substance of the article. Comandante42 (talk) 00:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Starkiller?

Ok, can someone provide me a link where they confirm the name starkiller, I mean I know the history of the name but it seems kinda outa left field here. User:Kazaan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.20.78.16 (talk) 21:50, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

His name isn't Starkiller. Starkiller is his codename. His real name is Galen Marek[1]Tyty1234 (talk) 22:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

"Galen Marek" .. sounds made up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.101.33.94 (talk) 03:54, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

It's in the Force Unleashed Novel. There are no reliable sources however, it's in that novel. Tyty1234 (talk) 05:28, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Darth Vader

I was just watching Star Wars Episode II on Spike TV, and they showed a preview from this game. It said that the player will take on Darth Vader in the first episode of the game (on Kashyyk), and he will be able to use force choke. This should probably be added to the article, but I don't have a source at the moment. -- Tkgd2007 (talk) 00:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• That isn't exactly new news.. There's an article on the Vanity Fair website from last month that says you start the game as Vader (http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/03/lucas200803?currentPage=3) I don't know why no added this information into the article yet though 96.240.192.172 (talk) 00:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Time Zones

Use something international for a a release date. It is not going to be summer everywhere in the world when this "multimedia project" comes out. 58.170.215.254 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 10:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Stop adding Wii to the platform list

Lucasarts has not confirmed that the game will be on the Wii. When and only when they do and you have proof provide a link so that we can confirm it and add Wii to the list. Whoever adds the Wii to the article again needs to provide a source here.--Kondrayus (talk) 15:27, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

There is a citation for it in the intro. I clicked to check it, but my employer in the last 48 hours has blocked Lucasarts (and other game publishers, and game review sites). Argh. Anyway, can someone check it out? --EEMIV (talk) 15:49, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

the Wii version was confirmed at the same time as the rest of the consoles, and has been talked about in numerous interviews. Most recentley the ones at Gametrailers.172.201.253.182 (talk) 21:52, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

hey i know it's on nintendo wii because it's on the eb games preorder list for shipment —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wicked.n (talk • contribs) 02:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Trivia Note?

Should this article mention that The Force Unleashed is the second time LucasArts has created a multimedia project that did not connect directly to a film?

The Force Unleashed follows the exact same pattern as Shadows of the Empire: Shadows featured a book, video games, a comic, and action figures. It was also took place between two movies, introduced new charecters along with old ones, and most of all, delved into the mindset of Darth Vader.

I would say a simple note in the trivia section (if there isn't one yet, there will be) would be perfect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.112.51.246 (talk) 03:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I apologize. I failed to notice that.--Kondrayus (talk) 16:33, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Here's a Gamespot citation about the Wii version.[2] Personally, it looks like the Wii version will be the most fun... EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

releases apr 8?

can anyone determine the validity of the release date mentioned here? http://www.gametrailers.com/player/29964.html Xenocidic (talk) 19:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

It's simply speculation, the only reliable source for a release dates is LucasArts and all they have said is "Summer 2008", until LA announce a date, Summer 2008 is what should be used. Peptastic (talk) 05:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Many sites are using Sep 16 as the release date now. That should be cited and used. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Radman622 (talk • contribs) 16:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

It already is... xenocidic (talk) 16:22, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

ToDo: Cite Havok/DMM/Euphoria section

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/29964.html Here's a GameTrailers video that should suffice as a citation for this section; I don't feel like writing out an actual cite tag, though. If somebody else would do this, I'd appreciate it. HoCkEy PUCK (talk) 00:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Order 66

Hi, In the last paragraph of this article, there is a reference to something called 'order 66'.

What is that? I've never heard of it.

PS. this was placed on the main page of the article before, my bad! Robin.lemstra (talk) 08:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

It is the order Palpatine delivers that calls for the murder of all the Jedi. The article on Order 66 was recently deleted, hence no helper-outer link. I'm running out the door to work right now, but if no one beats me to it, I'll clarify this article's text later this morning. --EEMIV (talk) 12:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

tie-in novel/action figures/comic book/reference book/role-playing game supplement

The release date of these things really needs a reference or needs to be removed, does anyone have a source for the date? I saw it got changed from August 26 to April 1st ('08) by an anonymous ip[3], but neither dates included a source.. Peptastic (talk) 00:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Wii = ?

Does the Wii version use DMM, Euphoria, and Havok? —Preceding

The wii version will not have DMM, Euphoria, and Havok. Those features are only on X-Box 360 and PS3. Instead the wii version will have 5 extra levels. --Chatterson (talk) 02:40, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

unsigned comment added by 12.206.95.207 (talk) 20:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Do you have any source that can confirm this? Samuitsuki (talk) 20:48, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately it's true, though I beleive it still has Havok: http://www.forceunleashed.net/news/exclusive-force-unleashed-levels-for-wii/ The Wii version not only gets 5 extra levels, it also has a multi-player mode as well to make up for this. Thesilverfalcon (talk) 02:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

There are several videos for the Force Unleashed on it's minisite on Lucasarts.com One of them (the non conventional console release video) goes into detail on the features of the Wii, PS2, PSP, and DS version. Notably, the alleged N-gage version is not mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Radman622 (talk • contribs) 16:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Lego

A lego set of 'The Rogue Shadow' has been released as part of a 'Force Unleashed' line [4]. Should this be mentioned? It contains a named character: 'Juno Eclipse, an Imperial officer', a battle damaged Darth Vader and Vader's apprentice --210.56.71.193 (talk) 04:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

"Juno Eclipse" ..sounds made up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.101.33.94 (talk) 15:25, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Seventh Generation

I changed the phrase from "next" generation to "seventh" generation, since the next generation will technically be the eigth generation.

I meant to explain the edit in the edit comments, but I accidently hit enter after typing two words. SirVenom (talk) 07:04, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

True enough. Don't forget to link to the relevant article explaning the term when doing so - [[History of video game consoles (seventh_generation)|seventh generation]]. xenocidic (talk) 14:34, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, yes. Forgot about that, thanks. SirVenom (talk) 19:28, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

engine

Why is the euphoria engine missing from the list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.121.22.69 (talk) 20:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Box Art

The Box Art needs to be neutralized to prevent favoritism, remove the Wii part of the box art please. 24.218.147.30 (talk) 01:51, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

There's no such need. --EEMIV (talk) 02:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

No, I actually agree. Multiplatform games should use boxart not tied to any console, see Call of Duty 4, Assassin's Creed etc. I think it says it somewhere in the article guidelines too. Thanks! Fin©™ 11:19, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Also on iPhone

Here is some video of the game being played on the iPhone. Should this be added to the article? --Jedravent (talk) 20:45, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes. I'm sure a more reliable source some time today/tomorrow will post more information. --EEMIV (talk) 03:36, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

"Starkiller" revealed

His name is Jacob Nion Katana Geldar 12:38, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Wookieepedia is not a reliable source, and it cites this claim to an unpublished book. We should wait for a reliable, accessible source substantiates this. --EEMIV (talk) 15:12, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Apparently, the book has already been released in Germany, and that seems to be where people are getting the information from, though I don't know how reliable the "released in Germany" claims are. 72.79.213.36 (talk) 16:03, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

It would appear that his name isn't "Jacob Nion" in the English version of the novel. Someone over on Wookieepedia has provided photographic evidence in the form of pictures of his copy of the english version, which is appearantly out in Sweeden, that seemingly prove that the characters name is "Galen Marek. Though, i'm not sure if the version released in Sweeden will be the same as the one released here in the U.S., so the name might change again. 96.233.177.215 (talk) 15:19, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Demo

Not that important as of yet, but the Star Wars The Force Unleashed demo has been confirmed for this month; GameTrailers has apparently announced the Demo will be released on the 21st. Link to the article: http://www.videogamer.com/xbox360/star_wars_the_force_unleashed/preview-921.html Link to specific mention of Demo: http://www.videogamer.com/news/12-05-2008-8259.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by LTenhet (talk • contribs) 21:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks -- it's already mentioned in the article. --EEMIV (talk) 23:05, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Historic Mode

What exactly are the 5 historic mode missions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.61.222.72 (talk) 00:26, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Apparently, they are Starkiller/Marek exploring historic areas. I can't remember the source, but I read somewhere an example would be exploring the ruins of the Jedi Temple on Coruscant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.0.174.214 (talk) 13:47, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

On the official site it said that one would be the fight between Vader and Luke on Cloud City. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.61.222.72 (talk) 16:03, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Tracksounds review

There is no reason not to include the soundtrack review in the critical reaction/reception section. The soundtrack is as much part of the game as graphics and characters, and certainly critics' comments on those distinct components will, when the game's out, go in this section. And moving the blurb to the Development section is just silly since, well, critics' response to the product has nothing to do with developing it. --EEMIV (talk) 20:08, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

As I've said, characters and graphics are referenced within reviews in the context of the game. The tracksounds review is a review of the soundtrack alone, without the game context. It should at least have a separate heading under reception. Fin©™ 20:10, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

And fair point, it shouldn't be in the development section, sorry =$ Fin©™ 20:10, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

In that case, I'll edit the blurb to mention that it was reviewed "out of context." --EEMIV (talk) 20:11, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it's fine now actually, just with a heading of soundtrack within reception. Fin©™ 20:12, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

'The Wii Version'

Is the wii version going to have all the effects like DMM & Euphoria? Or is it only for the PS3 and X-Box 360 version of the game?

I think the wii version will not have the effects as it is not the seventh generation console.

First, the Wii version has not been confirmed yet. And the Wii is a seven generation console.

The game is in fact on Wii. And yes, it is a seventh gen console.--Kondrayus (talk) 16:37, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

why is it a 7th gen? it processor is basically the same technology as the gamecube. the only thing different is it has slightly more power and wiimote. just because it is release during the period other manufacturer is releasing 7th gen hardware doesn't make it 7th gen. the wii version of the game is not made by lucasart, another studio will be producing it, they are clearly treating it like PS2. :P Akinkhoo (talk) 05:36, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

If this wasn't a knowlegde site, I would have cursed the (Insert Your favourite Vulgar word here)out of you, graphics don't mean "Next-Gen", infact the Wii is the Most next gen as it does something knew. Also they are not treating it like the PS2, its not a port and it has stuff the PS2, 360 and the others don't. Ive seen your Sony fanboy nonsense on other talk pages so do us a favor and Shut Up, Im not some Nintendo fanboy cause i own a 360 and a wii, and i got a ds and a psp so im not some damm fanboy like you (Note, this will be on the discussion page too, aswell as your talk page. And this is for talking about the game, not your stupid and crazy ideas about what next gen is. Mr.Deathhawk (talk) 21:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

ow stop saying wii isnt seventh gen just because nintendo thought it was more important to revolutionize the way games are played instead just making the system have better graphics doesnt mean its sixth gen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thad505 (talk • contribs) 14:11, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

call it what generation you want as i am not here to argue what generation it is, cause it wouldn't change fact of what it is and how well it will be doing, heck if being the latest in generation wins, most people will be using mac then windows ;). the discuss here is about starwars:tfu, and it doesn't change the fact that wii version isn't going to be outsource to other developers and it will not be using lucasart's custom engine. Akinkhoo (talk) 20:40, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Fanboyism aside, there is a wii version but its heavily stripped down in terms of technical prowess. If you want to see the effects of DMM and the Euphoria engine, get te ps3 or 360 version. The wii has enhanced controls for combat etc... using the wii-mote but it does not contain most of the effects that the ps3 and 360 versions do. It's still a great game on the platform, but I found the wii version really lacking espescially in later levels when your powers do so much damage (on the 360/ps3 version). Also, it was licensed out to Krome and not Lucasarts which only handled the 360/ps3 versions. I'd compare the wii version on par with the ps2 version. But check out the videos for yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.83.80.13 (talk) 10:58, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

IT'S COMING OUT FOR PC TOO.

I went ahead and removed this because it is offensive,and it is vandilism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.18.132.25 (talk) 04:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Nice work! No need to justify such a good faith vandal reversion on the talk page. Have you considered creating an account? xenocidic (talk) 04:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Its old yes but have you ever realized this guy tricked you good, he said its coming out for pc than tried to make it look like he was reverting vanalism —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.138.216.89 (talk) 20:27, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Is it worth mentioning...

...that 'Starkiller' was the original surname for Luke Skywalker? According, that is, to this page82.9.226.9 (talk) 18:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I've added it to the article, although it strikes me as being just a bit of trivia. I'm sure someone out there -- a producer or critic -- will make the cite-able and more interesting assertion that the character in TFU is named after/in homage to the original character name. --EEMIV (talk) 19:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Reviews infobox.

This thing is super-tall, and I think unnecessarily so (I admit being quite responsible for that). It occurs to me that citing individual publications'/web sites' scores but citing them to aggregators -- when aggregators, too, are listed separate -- probably isn't necessary. If I see a GameSpot score listed in the infobox and want to see substantiation of the score, I click on the citation link, and the footnote takes me to their full review. However, the Official Xbox Magazine citations, for example, just take me back to an aggregator site. Anticipating even more reviews for this much-anticipated game to come in, I propose -- and right now am doing -- the removal from the infobox of scores attributed to specific publications/web sites but substantiated by aggregator scores. (I looked for some precedent or model to mimic: Halo 3 doesn't cite its game scores, and COD4 cites scores straight to the publication/site -- or vice versa.) I hope this will avoid the infobox from continuing to grow prodigiously big, and perhaps even head off a need at some point down the line to say, "Okay, enough with the entering of scores". (I didn't see anything in the Video Game WikiProject article guidelines about a recommended cap on infobox scores, or a way of reaching consensus on which ones to include.) I suppose TFU is unique in that it is being distributed on so many platforms; there conceivably would be a lot of scores we could pile in. And if someone wants to restore a score but cited straight to the publication/site, but all means do so. Or, heck, if someone objects to my thinking here, go ahead and undo it. I'm just trying to keep the layout from being so lop-sided. (Would it look too ridiculous, perhaps, just to move the infobox further up into the article?) I'll preserve User:EEMIV/TFUscores the infobox as it stands if anyone wants to re-insert the scores I'm removing, or wants a lead on which sites/publications to scope out so we can directly link to their material. (What to do about print-only scores? Yeah, I don't know. But I also don't know which ones are print-only.) --EEMIV (talk) 01:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

TBH, I don't at the moment see a problem with it; whilst the box is big, there's plenty of text alongside it so, on my screen at least, it's not generating a load of white space. There will be a lot of reviews, but I don't believe it's necessary to list every one. I think we've got plenty atm, I don't see the need to add more unless they say something different to the others (ie it's the best game ever, or it's total pants). At the moment the reviews are balanced and representative.

The other option I guess is to move the infobox to immediately below the main game infobox and run the article down the side of both. Just have to be careful that we don't get lumps of white space. --Ged UK (talk) 07:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Starkiller split into separate article?

I think the character has enough backstory and concept/creation, and reception information to warrant its own article. Bly1993 (talk) 01:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Probably not. The character in and of itself has not received significant coverage by multiple third-party sources; a stand-alone article would be inappropriate. --EEMIV (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The PSP version

The PSP version has at least 40% more storyline content than the xbox 360 version. It has a lot more cut scenes. You can look at them on youtube. I do not understand why the development team did not add more storyline content to the home system versions. It should be included in this article that the PSP version is actually better -- storywise -- than the home console versions. 71.103.94.89 (talk) 17:56, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Name

Usually when there are multiple topics with the same name, the one that gets the name without any dab phrases in parentheses is the most popular one, right? I get the impression that when people type in "Star Wars: The Force Unleashed" it is more likely for them to be looking for the game, and not the multimedia project. So that's why I suggest that the article about the game be moved to "Star Wars: The Force Unleashed", and the one about the multimedia project to receive a dab phrase in parentheses. Diego_pmc ^Talk 10:26, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

That makes sense. Let's wait a few days to see if there's any opposition. After there isn't any ;-), you can put it in as an uncontest move request (or some admin. watching this page, if you're not one, can do it). --EEMIV (talk) 22:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I object to the move. The game is just a part of a larger project. The project as a whole is "The Force Unleashed" so it should be left at Star Wars: The Force Unleashed, while the game, which is only a part of the larger project should stay where it is. Even Wookieepedia has it this way, with Wookieepedia:Star Wars: The Force Unleashed being the article for the project as a whole, and having the game article at: Wookieepedia:Star Wars: The Force Unleashed (video game). I think Star Wars: The Force Unleashed should be used for the project as a whole, the same way that Star Wars is used for the entire franchise as a whole, and that the game should stay at Star Wars: The Force Unleashed (video game). Not that my opinion will make any difference, but that's my 2 cents. 96.240.200.40 (talk) 16:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Hierarchically you are right, however there are several naming conventions, that are used by a lot of encyclopedias, not just Wikipedia. In a nutshell, these conventions say that (a) the most common name should be used (for example "Bill Clinton", not "William Clinton") (b) the article to use the title without any dab phrases should be the most popular one, because most people will be looking for that one. There is one simple and very good reason for this - to make the search easier for as many people as possible. When I was new to Wikipedia, I also though the same as you, but with time I realized that this is the best way to do things. Diego_pmc ^Talk 19:25, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The name change makes a lot of sense, given how often people (mostly anon. IP visitors) add game-specific information to non-dab.ed article. --EEMIV (talk) 19:30, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Very well then. I still don't like the idea of moving the articles, but you both make good points, so I guess you can go ahead with it. 96.233.189.74 (talk) 19:49, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be any problem. Where should i ask for the move to be made? Diego_pmc ^Talk 15:14, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I suggest

• Star Wars: The Force Unleashed -> Star Wars: The Force Unleashed (project)
• Star Wars: The Force Unleashed (video game) -> Star Wars: The Force Unleashed

--EEMIV (talk) 15:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

No, where as in is there some kind of procedure, or do I just ask an admin? Diego_pmc ^Talk

Wikipedia:Requested moves

Sales info

Has this been added in yet? Apparently the game sold over 1.5 million copies in one week, making it "the fastest-selling title in both LucasArts and Star Wars history." If it isn't already there, this probably needs adding to the Reception section. -- Comandante {Talk} 23:58, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I saw that and almost added it, but GameSpot is citing LucasArts' own press release. Given their own source, I don't think it qualifies as an objective, reliable source. However, I'm keeping an eye on vgchartz.com, which should have those first-week sales soon. Thanks for the heads up, though! --EEMIV (talk) 00:12, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem. If you hadn't mentioned the stuff above, I actually would have added it in tomorrow anyway. I never considered the source's objectivity, I just thought it was a useful scrap about sales numbers. Thanks for catching it. -- Comandante {Talk} 00:36, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Vader and Starkiller confusion

“ If the player attacks and kills Vader, the Emperor offers to let Starkiller take Vader's place as his apprentice if Starkiller proves himself by killing Kota. Starkiller instead attacks the Emperor, who crushes Starkiller with the Rogue Shadow. The story ends with Starkiller's broken body being grafted with armor so he can serve as the Emperor's assassin until Palpatine finds a new apprentice. ”

I have some questions about that statement in the article. First of all, it implies that Starkiller has succesfully killed Vader, and is later crushed by Palpatine. Ok. But then it says that Palpatine grafts Starkiller with armour so he can still serve him, does this mean Starkiller has now assumed Vader's identity? Do both their armours look the same? I havn't played the game, but the text does not make it clear. I guess what I suggested cannot be right, as otherwise how would Starkiller (and why would he) tell Luke that he is his [Vader's] son? Please enlighten me someone, cheers. Blooded Edge ^Sign/_Talk 19:14, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

No, Starkiller doesn't assume Vader's persona; the armor is quite different. Your reading of the sentence is otherwise entirely accurate. Pursuing this route, I presume, would not lead to the events in the rest of the Star Wars canon; I'm sure before too long, some reliable source will assert that claim and we can more clearly differentiate it. --EEMIV (talk) 19:35, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

The novel ends with Starkiller sacrificing himself so that the senators can escape with Juno, thus continuing the Rebel Alliance. i.e. attacking rescuing Kota in the game. Which I've added back to the article for the third time, and hopefully my references meet with your approval. Thedarxide (talk) 22:14, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks very much for clearing that up for me :). Blooded Edge ^Sign/_Talk 20:16, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Small wording problem

The sentence "Upon reaching adulthood, Vader sends the apprentice [...]" should be reworded. The way it is now it is understood that Vader is the one that reaches his adulthood, and then sends the apprentice on a mission. Diego_pmc ^Talk 20:14, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Better Reviews

we need more positive reviews the aarticle is atking away from the game —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.169.29.20 (talk) 15:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The article is a reflection of published reviews. If you have more positive ones, please post them! --Ged UK (talk) 20:22, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The cited reviews are from mainstream, widely-read sources, and there seems to be a consensus about the game's good and bad qualities. Cherry-picking reviews to avoid "[taking] away from the game" would be a blatant violation of the neutral point of view policy. --EEMIV (talk) 20:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

you guys are right im just upset because I actually liked the game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.169.29.3 (talk) 15:44, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The problem with reveiws, is that they are made by guys who go through about 50 games a year, and GAMES in general aren't as fun to them as a casual gamer, Therefore they are more critical. "Average joe" reveiws are usually more indicative of the main community attitude.--70.71.240.170 (talk) 03:19, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

You could have fooled me. The cited reviews are some of the most ignorant I've ever seen. The gameplay and boss battles were clearly the most entertaining parts of the game: the storyline was good through most of the game, but the last mission totally wrecked everything that the game had been building all along. These reviewers hated everything good and loved everything bad about the game. These aren't people who have been playing games since they came out; its disgusting to think that some of them actually thought the game was hard in standard combat. The game 'media' industry is a joke. They're paid to like or dislike whatever they're told to. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 22:58, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Just pointing out that this is not a forum, so general discussion of the game should be taken to a forum. Also, a reminder to not edit the articles based on your opinions of the game. A critic is not "ignorant" because he or she did not share your views on the game. 72.153.247.120 (talk) 22:43, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, thank you very much for the insightful commentary. No one here was making general discussion about the game. If reviewers give a game bad scores because its publishing company didn't dish out enough money to pay for a lengthy article, no that doesn't make them ignorant (nobody said it did), it makes them corrupt. Thanks for taking a vested interest in the wealth fair and public view of the gaming media industry and its reviewers, though. I'm sure they appreciate it. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 12:51, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

New DLC: Star Wars: The Force Unleashed Character Pack

Download 7 brand new characters such as Jedi Knight Anakin Skywalker, Jedi Knight Obi-Wan Kenobi, Jedi Knight Luke Skywalker, Imperial Commando, Darth Sion, Ki-Adi-Mundi and Kit Fisto. Also you’ll get 3 all new Secret Apprentice costumes including Hooded Combat Gear, General Starkiller and Sith Assassin. That's according to the official PlayStation site. FaithLehaneTheVampireSlayer 18:56, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Cheats

194.46.251.61 (talk) 15:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)Does anyone know any cheats for this game because I think the artical could be improved by adding a few in.194.46.251.61 (talk) 15:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a gameguide. --EEMIV (talk) 16:36, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Name+something else

Should we call him stardkiller throughout the artical? The project was codenamed starkiller but that isn't his name. Also the time where you pull a stardestroyer out of the sky was only a cutscene on the wii so should that be mentioned along with the critics complaining about it? 70.240.108.0 (talk) 01:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Enough goddamn "quotation marks"

Are people really sure there's enough "Quotation Marks" in this goddamn advertisement masquerading as a wikipedia article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.90.160.28 (talk) 04:37, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Every platform but PC?????

I've been researching this game about as much as I can stand and I haven't found anywhere that gives any indication at all that there may be a future release for PC platform. Does anyone know for sure if this is true or not? I just can't imagine that they would just pass the PC on this one. 70.185.251.98 (talk) 01:05, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

The article itself articulates (with effective citations) exactly why LucasArts isn't releasing a PC version. --EEMIV (talk) 01:36, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Should there be any discussion about the controversy concerning their reason for not making it available for the PC? The sum of their argument is that it would be too "CPU-intensive" for a PC, anyone with even basic knowledge of PC / console tech knows this is completely inaccurate, worst case scenario maybe it would require a quad core CPU but even that is a stretch when you consider current dual core CPU capabilities. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.154.105.229 (talk) 04:03, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

While there might be debate on whether their reasons for not porting it to PC where accurate, it hasn't approached anything close to a "controversy" and really isn't notable enough to include in the article. KhalfaniKhaldun 22:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

You're talking semantics. Google the words "Force Unleashed" and "PC"; of the first 50 hits 90% of them talk about this subject. IGN has a year and a half old thread about this that still gets posts. You start off by conceding that there "might" be debate over the truthfulness of LucasArts reasons for not porting it to the PC, then unilaterally decide the word "controversy" doesn't apply? I'm asking for opinions as to whether this should be mentioned, not a critique of my vocabulary choices. If you really want to argue the meaning of the word check out Wikipedia's article on "controversy"; it's description certainly matches this situation.

Does anyone else have an opinion as to whether this... DEBATE should be mentioned? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.154.105.229 (talk) 05:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, this definitly should come out. The treason LucasArts is doing to the PC gaming fan base which has supported it since its begginings it's only comparable to Order Sixty-Six —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.243.62.210 (talk) 05:04, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

PC Release date / System reqs

Amazon.com is now listing the PC version of the game (Ultimate Sith Edition) for pre-order ($36.99 from the suggested retail price of $39.99) and release date of NOVEMBER 3, 2009.

System requirements:

Star Wars: The Force Unleashed - Ultimate Sith Edition System Requirements* Intel CPU - Core 2 Duo T5500 1.66GHz AMD CPU - Turion 64 X2 Mobile TL-52 Nvidia Graphics Card - Geforce 6800 GS ATI & Intel Graphics Card - Radeon 9800 Pro RAM - 1 Gbs Hard Disk Space - 7 Gbs Direct X - 9

• System requirements displayed are based on recommended system requirements and should be used as a guide only.

source: [5] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.53.59.87 (talk) 23:34, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Amazon has revised the release date of the PC version for October 23, 2009, while the console versions of "Ultimate Sith Edition" retain the Nov. 3rd date.

Screenshot

Can anyone snag a better screenshot for the Gameplay section? The current one is muddled and not very clear. --EEMIV (talk) 14:17, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

DLC

I think we should perhaps make it clear how the expansion levels appear in the game, i.e. do they appear in a separate DLC section or does a player need to go back into story mode and it just continues into them? Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 19:22, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Cully F's name

Anyone know how best to ascertain the correct spelling of Cully Fred[mumblemumble]son's name?

• Cully Fredricksen at IMDb
• Cully Fredrickson at one starwars.com page . . .
• . . . but Cully Frederickson at another and another starwars.com pages
• Cully Fredricksen at inbaseline.com, listing "Fredericksen" and "Fredrickson" as "aka"s.

6,150 ghits for Fredricksen and 21,800 at Fredericksen -- but, even with the latter, the first hit is to the other spelling's entry at IMDb. --EEMIV

I wouldn't put much faith in the Google hits, and IMDB is basically a Wiki-like site (though it's a little more difficult to edit). I'd probably go with what is actually in the game itself, unfortunately I don't have the game to check. blackngold29 15:36, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

sequel

I have read on IGN that the Force Unleashed 2 has been confirmed, but it's so early that people are making up stories, like what people are doing currently to ace Combat 7 (though there is no such thing as Ace Combat 7 as of yet) m w (talk) 11:57, 4 November 2009 (UTC)Phthinosuchusisanancestor

So . . . ? I eBayed my copy of the game -- can someone check the credits listing? --EEMIV (talk) 00:04, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Well there is no mention of it. m w (talk) 11:59, 4 November 2009 (UTC)Phthinosuchusisanancestor

Please, indent your posts. The page goes bonzo otherwise. Anyway, where's this IGN link? And what was that about eBay? --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 12:24, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

PC Release Date

The listed release date for PC is wrong. All the stores around here in Montana already have it and I just bought it. Newegg has had it available for purchase since yesterday. Alyeska (talk) 20:13, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Multiplayer

There's no mention in this article that the Wii version featured a 1 on 1 multiplayer duel mode, with tons of characters available. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.244.203.239 (talk) 08:25, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

New threads go to the bottom. Secondly, here. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 13:52, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Code name vs. pseudonym

Can anyone offer a compelling reason not to use "code name" -- which is the term used in the cited source, and which bluelinks to a different article than pseudonym -- to describe Starkiller's moniker? Please offer one up. --EEMIV (talk) 18:04, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

First of all, sorry for undoing your edit. I just noticed it (and no edit conflict occurred for some reason). Secondly, there is a reason for why I think pseudonym works better but I can't fit it into words. Give me a bit of time to try and force it into text. Sorry I can't help sort this out instantly. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 18:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

"Pseudonum" is much more generic than "code name", and given that sources mention it as a "code name", that's what aughta be used. --Teancum (talk) 19:16, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Damn it, I give up. Sorry, but I can't find the words to explain why I feel it should be psuedonym. Sorry for wasting everyone's time. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 19:17, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Australian release date

Should probably be specified - if it's out in Australia yet. If not, "2009 Q3" may need a correction.--Krainert (talk) 17:15, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Trophies

Does this game support PSN trophies? AGENT SMITH 02:07, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Rahm Kota

SieBot just added a link to the Polish article on Rahm Kota. Should we delete it? Because it's not really equivalent to this article, is it? --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 19:41, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Erm, I dunno the policies/guidelines about translated/non-en-wiki links. This article covers the character in the most depth, but it's not the main focus. I'm inclined to remove it because of the latter -- but what's the WP: link that discusses the rules/suggestions in general? --EEMIV (talk) 19:44, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Australian release

The infobox still lists "Q3 2009" as the PC release date. Did it come out in Q3? Can anyone offer/add a specific date? --EEMIV (talk) 04:26, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

TFU was released on Steam in Australia on December 16, 2009. I'll update the article now. [SCΛRECROW]^{CrossCom 2.0} 05:01, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! --EEMIV (talk) 05:26, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Word Usage

How should this sentence read?

Vader sends his apprentice to foster a rebellion among those who resist the Empire...

I ask because "foster" was just changed to foment and back again. Foment means to "incite or cause troublesome acts; to encourage; to instigate." Foster means to "cultivate and grow something." Both are technically correct, but how should we define it? Was the Rebellion created by Starkiller (if so, use foment)? Or was it already in existence, but he brought it into the open and made it into a real threat to the Empire (if so, use foster)? Personally, I think points can be made for both sides, so I brought it here rather than risk starting an edit war over it. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 15:36, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I am inclined toward "foster" or even just "support." The game itself, and the EU material surrounding this era, make it clear there was a rebellion of sorts happening long before Starkiller appears. --EEMIV (talk) 18:12, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

While foment may be a more precise term, the average reader will not understand its meaning. I'm going with foster. --Teancum (talk) 18:32, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Dead or Alive?

This question involves weather the light side ending of the plot, should question his death. We know that the upcoming sequel has a story that is raising question about Starkiller's demise. Should we include this in the article or not? Your thoughts please.--P dump (talk) 17:38, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Basing it off of a discussion on Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare where Captain Price's survival was being discussed, it is not relevant to this article that Starkiller is alive. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 17:47, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

What the Falcon said. Furthermore, the claim in the article about which ending the game builds on is uncited. One more time, P dump: WP:NOR. --EEMIV (talk) 18:14, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Reply: But if you notice WP:NOR states: "Carefully summarizing or rephrasing source material without changing its meaning or implication is not a violation of this policy, it is good editing". I'm saying that it be worded to leave the possibility of Starkiller's survival into the sequel. Replacing words like martyr with sacrifice would be more along these lines, not changing the meaning, but not cancelling out the unknown plot of the sequel.--P dump (talk) 19:32, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but the first game quite clearly states he's dead (something I'll be fascinated to see the second game explain away). Therefore, saying he isn't is irrelevant to this article. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 19:58, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Severe Reorganization

It may just be me, but it appears that the article has become severly cluttered. This current page format seems to be too disorganized for the amount of information that it holds. I am also offering to create an official page for the Ultimate Sith Edition, and the other expansion having the article reference this. This would simplify the article quite a bit. I would ask for your thoughts on this.--P dump (talk) 19:49, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I seriously doubt there's anything on the Ultimate Sith Edition that can't be said on this article. And can you give details of what is cluttered and disorganised? --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 19:59, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm thinking of things I don't usually see on video game pages, honestly alot of things can be ubsorbed into other subheadings. Like "ILM collaboration and cast performance" is something I don't really think is all that nessesary. And can't the "Story" be ubsorbed into "Plot" and "Expansion" could either be its own page or level 2 headline.--P dump (talk) 20:53, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

The structure of this article follows the videogame wikiproject style guides, and essentially mirrors the setup of featured articles like Halo 3. The ILM section is there because a notable aspect of this game's development is, in fact, the ILM/LucasArts collaboration (read the article for more information). Don't know what you mean by "Story being ubsorbed into Plot." As for the expansion thing, no, it doesn't need it's own separate article. The expansion section includes a good chunk of "development" info, hence its presence there (and it is also appropriate to keep before the Reception section, because there is commentary about the expansions at the bottom end). --EEMIV (talk) 21:02, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

By the story thing, he means this section should be merged with the plot summary. That's a "no" because that section involved the development of the story. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 21:12, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

My main point is to get the gigantic cast/character thing reduced, and ubsorbed. If you look at it the Halo 3 page did good with. And one thing that the expansion fails to cover here is it's unusual plot. Far as I can remember, this is the first time that LucasArts made a non-canonical video game. That's something very noteable to me.--P dump (talk) 21:19, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Being notable for you (or me), unfortunately, doesn't always mean notable for Wikipedia. If any of the gaming press have devoted ink or bytes to this departure from LucasArts' previous pursuits, then we can include it. For the time being, though, it's just more downloadable content/a typical "End of Year" package that plenty of games have done before -- Fable II, Fallout 3 and The Elder Scrolls all had "let's put everything together onto one disc" editions, and those don't warrant or have any particular extra coverage.

As for the character stuff being moved elsewhere -- simply, no. In this regard, this article more closely follows the pattern of some of Wikipedia's better move articles, where there is sufficient information and commentary on the individual characters separate from their simple actions as part of the plot. Trying to cover the real-world aspects of the characters while absorbed in a description of the game's basic plot would be a mess -- it would, in fact, create the kind of clutter and disorganization you're trying to raise a flag about. --EEMIV (talk) 21:25, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

So I take it you think that the article is just fine the way it is. And if I find what about the expansion it could be its own article?--P dump (talk) 21:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Series page time?

So with the release of The Force Unleashed II, is it time to create a series page for The Force Unleashed? The answer: Not right now. The needed information for number 2 just isn't there yet. However a series page in the future will enable us to expand upon the infinities timeline, without clutter to the original's article.--P dump (talk) 21:37, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Press release?

Can anyone find a LucasArts-hosted or non-fan-site-hosted copy of the press release posted here? For the time being, I've referenced it to TFN in the article, but would prefer either bypassing the middleman or being able to cite it to e.g. GameSpot. --EEMIV (talk) 13:02, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Got it. --EEMIV (talk) 04:09, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Sequel

Any reason why the sequel isn't mentioned on the page?

Well, for one thing, it is. It's pretty far down, though -- all the way at the end of the first paragraph. --EEMIV (talk) 23:23, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Plot ending

"If the player attacks and defeats Emperor Palpatine, Kota prevents Starkiller from killing Palpatine in hatred."

It seems that Palpatine wasn´t defeated after the duel. Starkiller himself said that it was only a trick of Palpatine pretending to be beaten. If not it wouldn´t make sense that Palpatine could throw lightnings at Kota and Starkiller only a few minutes later.77.11.172.49 (talk) 14:57, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Multi-player exclusive characters

It seems that multi-player duel characters like Luke Skywalker are missing Pikachu Bros. (talk) 17:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Star Wars: The Force Unleashed. 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/20110628202358/http://www.starwars.com/databank/character/starkiller/ to http://www.starwars.com/databank/character/starkiller/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090728165730/http://comic-con.gamespot.com/story/6214122/force-unleashed-unleashing-more-dlc-sith-edition to http://comic-con.gamespot.com/story/6214122/force-unleashed-unleashing-more-dlc-sith-edition
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629014445/http://www.starwars.com/databank/character/lukeskywalker/ to http://www.starwars.com/databank/character/lukeskywalker/

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) 01:07, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Star Wars: The Force Unleashed. 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/20090223020033/http://gamesblog.ugo.com/index.php/gamesblog/more/star_wars_the_force_unleashed_interview1 to http://gamesblog.ugo.com/index.php/gamesblog/more/star_wars_the_force_unleashed_interview1/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071101103217/http://www.starwars.com/gaming/videogames/news/f20071031/index.html to http://www.starwars.com/gaming/videogames/news/f20071031/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629015939/http://www.starwars.com/gaming/videogames/news/f20070918/index.html?page=2 to http://www.starwars.com/gaming/videogames/news/f20070918/index.html?page=2
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080915231705/http://www.starwars.com/gaming/videogames/news/news20070316.html to http://www.starwars.com/gaming/videogames/news/news20070316.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110628201855/http://www.starwars.com/gaming/videogames/news/f20070322/index.html to http://www.starwars.com/gaming/videogames/news/f20070322/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110628201827/http://www.starwars.com/gaming/videogames/news/news20070301.html to http://www.starwars.com/gaming/videogames/news/news20070301.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080915231655/http://www.starwars.com/gaming/videogames/news/news20070222.html to http://www.starwars.com/gaming/videogames/news/news20070222.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080919001728/http://www.oxmonline.com/article/reviews/xbox-360/s-z/star-wars-force-unleashed to http://www.oxmonline.com/article/reviews/xbox-360/s-z/star-wars-force-unleashed
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203085520/http://www.wga.org/content/default.aspx?id=3484 to http://www.wga.org/content/default.aspx?id=3484

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) 13:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Star Wars: The Force Unleashed. 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/20080422013529/http://www.music4games.net/Features_Display.aspx?id=253 to http://www.music4games.net/Features_Display.aspx?id=253

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) 07:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)