Talk:Dragon Quest III

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleDragon Quest III has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 30, 2007Good article nomineeListed
May 2, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
April 22, 2013Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

Known Glitches[edit]

Should there be a bit in here about glitches? The GBC version had a big one concerning the Pachisi track, which can cause major issues. 69.175.87.236 01:20, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the NES version, there are some major glitches involving using numb characters to corrupt the RAM. The game can be completely broken in many ways. Items can be glitched into the inventory, return locations can be added, and the party can even get infinite gold and experience points. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.179.173.95 (talk) 05:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NES is different from Game Boy remake[edit]

Resolved

I think that more differences between the classes on the NES and Game Boy need to be pointed out. I am not familiar with a "Dealer" class, but the NES has a "merchant" class that can obtain extra money from battles and appraise the value of equipment and items. Also, in the NES Dragon Warrior, no single class become a sage without the Book of Satori-- not even jesters. Jesters are the only class that the other classes cannot change class to, but I heard that this was changed in the Game Boy remake. --Rika95 06:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dealers and Merchants are the same class. As for Goof-offs, I cannot personally verify it, but according to GameFAQs they can become Sages without a Book of Satori in the NES version. Anyway, I'm marking this as resolved, as the article now covers differences between the original version and the remakes. -- Gordon Ecker 03:38, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Map Looks Like Earth[edit]

The Plot section is totally redundant and either needs to be revamped or completely rewritten. The paragraphs are just different versions of each other. Also, the "point of fact" about the map looking like Earth will need a cite. I agree that most of it looks similar, but I'm going to need to be convinced about the Asia continent. <~~ That's just me being a dork. Disregard it.--Fuen Fuboo 16:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

if theres no complaints, im going to just get rid of that. its wayy too original researchy. Evaunit666 03:41, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If any can find a reference for this, it will be exceptable to put back in the article. Evaunit666 02:22, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like Earth during a past age. The implication is that this world is prehistoric earth, or perhaps the meaning is deeper: that the game is a reflection of man's prehistoric psyche. That's what I thought when I played it. Tcaudilllg (talk) 00:48, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GAC?[edit]

Should this article be nominated for Good Article candidate? It seems ready for it; if not, it's still really close to it. Kariteh 17:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You think so? I was going to try and get some more references and stuff, but if you think it'd pass, sure, why not? Evaunit666 02:38, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm thinking its ready. Any suggestions? Evaunit666 02:48, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably ready. Great work. Kariteh 08:46, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rad, thanks. Evaunit666 02:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Date[edit]

Does anyone know for sure when the original nes Dragon Warrior 3 came out in America? I'm finding like four different dates and I'm not sure which ones right. Evaunit666 05:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think i got it under control. Thanks, Fueny! Evaunit666 02:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA on hold[edit]

  • A few issues to work on before it gets a GA star;
    • There is a citation needed tag in the reception section,
    • There should be a character section citation;
    • Is there any other information on the sound track release?

Let me know how this goes! Judgesurreal777 20:48, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added some citations and some more info about the soundtracks and remakes, but I couldnt find a source for where that citation tag was (Ive been looking for awhile now), so i just got rid of the unsourced detail. Evaunit666 03:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Congratulations! You met the criteria, it's well referenced, comprehensive, stable, and reasonably well written. Thoughts going foreword for FA status....Mainly, from my experience, focus on more development/reception, and copyediting the article, those are the main sticking points usually. Good luck! Judgesurreal777 04:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the support! Evaunit666 04:56, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Localization Differences[edit]

I'm surprised there's no section for the localization differences. The American release of Dragon Warrior III included an entire cinematic intro of a warrior fighting a dragon that wasn't in the original Dragon Quest III, for example. Anyone want to add this?--Gocchin 13:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, there were some language items censored, and the removal of Christian symbols. Need to have something to Ref this with. Sgetz (talk) 19:16, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Map similar to real world[edit]

In the setting section, this observation has been added and deleted and added again a few times. I don't really feel comfortable with it unless we have a source; I won't delete it right now, but I don't like it there. If anyone who wants to keep that info in there, they really need to find a good source to back it up. Evaunit♥666♥ 23:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's an interesting question, because (IMO) it's abundantly clear just LOOKING at a world map that it's meant to resemble a twisted around version of the real world. (But then, I suppose that just being really really obvious was never a good reason to put it in, was it?) Of course, this also means that there will never be a good cite for it, because the creators will have found it too obvious to comment on? Perhaps just put a map graphic somewhere in the article and let readers draw their own conclusions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.231.208.52 (talk • contribs) 07:52, 10 July 2008

I think an image would be best. An explicit sentence probably isn't needed, considering this game is far from being the only game with a map modelled after the real world. Kariteh (talk) 08:18, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't make sense that it keeps getting deleted, since the resemblance to the real world is painfully obvious, unlike the world of, say, Golden Sun, whose landmasses don't resemble the real world at all, but are still apparently (somewhat vaguely) based on the real world. --Evice (talk) 01:45, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I found a secondary source: this article on gamasutra. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 00:45, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Little late in the game here; but i think the nintendo power magazine august 1991 or july 1991 (one with the gameboy mageman on the cover) mentions hat the map is like earth. maybe that source if true is valid Ottawa4ever (talk) 15:54, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment[edit]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Dragon Warrior III/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article became a Good Article a year and a half ago and it pretty much went down-hill. The key points for its reassessment include:

  • The Class section is tagged with a additional citations needed tag.
  • In fact, the Characters section is like the Class section, but shorter and not really informative, meaning it fails criterion 1.
  • EGM, Nintendo Power, and Gamepro aren't referenced parts in the Reception section, thus (but not sure) fails criterion 2.
  • Both screenshots in the article are improper use of fair use images, a failure of criterion 6 of the WP:GACR.

So, in today's standards for a Good Article, this article should be demoted and maybe become a C-class article.Give me your thoughts. GamerPro64 (talk) 00:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delist (very regretfully, as this is one of my personal favorite RPGs) for the following reasons:
  • The content in the Class section, while it may be argued that it's verifiable, only takes from one sources and is written rather poorly. Content also consists is minutiae of the DW3 gameplay, running afoul of Wikipedia is not a game guide. Gameplay section is written in the same fashion and likewise rather poorly. Plot and Setting subsections are the same thing; the content is either written in-universe or, if there is any real-world perspective given, seems to delve into original research. All of this is more than enough to fail GA criterion #1.
  • The first gameplay image does not help readers any in understanding the article further. Images (especially non-free images) need to complement the prose; that is, if the image was to be removed, would the reader lose any understanding of the content it's trying to cover? In this case, no. The same can be argued with the SNES screenshot. Also, boxart is not of lowest-resolution or size, failing WP:NFCC#8. I would argue the necessity of the album cover in the article. In any case, all images need to improve their non-free rationale or, alternatively, be removed. Clearly fails GA criterion #6.
  • There are huge tracts of unsourced content throughout the article. Fails #2. MuZemike 17:48, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist Though editors put a lot of good effort into expanding the article, it's C-class. The huge amount of character-class info is mostly yap-yap-yap, yet the main gameplay section is tiny and skips over the relevant details in favour of the options to sort the inventory. The production info is virtually non-existent (2 sentences), though the SNES remake info is good. Reception is also hit/miss, the info on units sold is very desirable but the actual reception information is non-existent - three review scores is it. No, while what's here is certainly good to have this article is neither balanced, broad or well-written. Someoneanother 02:11, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, since two people say delist, I'll delist it and give it C-class. GamerPro64 (talk) 00:46, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mini Medals/Tiny Medals Question[edit]

I was reading the changes included with the SF and GB remakes, and was confused by this statement. "The Tiny Medal system, which lets players collect hidden medals, seen in later Dragon Quest games, was added.[4] This system was also included in the remakes of the previous Dragon Quest games as well." The Tiny Medals originated in Dragon Quest IV for the NES, and to my memory, were not in DQ or DQ II. Should this line be edited for clarification? Sgetz (talk) 16:14, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Updates[edit]

I have referenced the NES manual in many areas of this guide, since it is actually a players guide. I found it in PDF format as well as the GBC version and posted the link to them in the first reference notes. I expanded on the characters section a bit, but it needs more I think. Thoughts? Sgetz (talk) 17:18, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added the Game Boy Color Box art to this because it is a different style from the original, and is referenced in the article. I used the format that was set up for the DQ IV article as a template. I also put non-free rationales on all of the screen shots in this article. I uploaded clearer, smaller, and pictures I could cite for the NES and Symphonic CD as they did not originally have links to their source. Sgetz (talk) 20:10, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think I have the Nintendo Power issue from when this game was reviewed. Does anyone know what issue of EGM or the GamePro this game was covered in? I could not find anything on their websites for this game. Sgetz (talk) 20:11, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA?[edit]

Should I put it up for GA yet?EVAUNIT-666 17:42, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GBC version box art?[edit]

Hi,

Why was the box art of the GBC version removed? Dragon Quest IV's page kept both the original box art and the DS version box art. Yottamol (talk) 15:31, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon Quest IV went through a name change in addition to a radical redesign of the box.陣内Jinnai 16:39, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

I think that there's some awkward focus; it seems to focus more on the remakes in its images than it does on the NES version. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 19:35, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Dragon Warrior III/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: David Fuchs (talk · contribs) 20:09, 13 March 2013 (UTC) In progress... ping me in a day or two if I haven't responded. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 20:09, 13 March 2013 (UTC) Sorry for the delay. Overall, the article is in fairly good shape, though there are a few issues:[reply]

  • Comprehensiveness:
    • I'm not entirely sure whether the very short development section (three sentences plus the music; the remakes section mostly covers differences, not actual development) meets the broad criteria of WP:WIAGA.
  • Images:
  • Prose:
    • I have no idea what "This is the final game in the Loto trilogy and is the first chronologically." means from the article, and it's not really explained later on in the article either.
    • There's two big problems with the prose, and one is puff phrases and redundancies. For and introduced innovations such as a persistent world with its own day-night cycle,[6] and an innovative class-changing system, "innovation" doesn't need to be used twice, and I'm not sure who's calling it innovative.
    • There's a lot of run-on sentences and comma splices in the gameplay section, of which The Hero's personality is determined by the player's choices and actions during a dream sequence at the start of the game, while other characters' personalities are determined by their stats at the end of the character generation process, most personalities are available to both male and female characters, while a few are exclusive to male or female characters. is probably the worst offender.
    • Why is the classes section after half a paragraph about classes earlier? Why isn't that information in the "classes" section, or vice versa?
    • Why are Baramos and a few other derivatives bolded? (WP:MOSBOLD)
    • If the setting comes after the plot and the latter is perfectly comprehensible without the former, I'm not sure you need a setting section.
    • and another "major innovation was the introduction of day/night cycles; certain items, characters, and quests are only accessible at certain times of day." - who is saying this?
  • References seem fine, I'm going to do a spot-check later for accuracy/close-paraphrasing.

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 16:22, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for the great review! I'm working through the issues, it's amazing that the game that was Dragon Quests breakout has so little development! I'll update this when its ready for another look. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:37, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I think it's ready for inspection! It is a world better than it was, I actually kept finding more development the more I dug. Let me know what else you would like. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:37, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the long delay. I've finally had enough time to give it a good review, and I think that you've sufficiently addressed all the issues for GA criteria. If you're planning on taking this further I'd try and get more copyeditors involved, but good job fleshing out the content side of things. Cheers, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 14:17, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Doubt about a reference[edit]

Hey guys. Can someone please tell me what is this reference? 

 <ref name="gspot_consolehist_d">{{Harvnb|Vestal|1998a|p="Dragon Quest III"|Ref=gspot_consolehist}}</ref>

I don't understand it. Is this a book? An article? All I find in google are copies of this Wiki. Prima.philosophia=D 00:42, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

It's a GameSpot's website. PS: I don't like Harvard note :P--Wangxuan8331800 (talk) 12:15, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Top selling Dragon Quest?[edit]

Hey guys. The source that indicates that this game is the top selling of the series dates back to 2000. According to some sources, DQIX is now the top selling of the series.

http://www.siliconera.com/2011/03/17/dragon-quest-ix-is-the-best-selling-game-in-the-series/

http://kotaku.com/5431694/dragon-quest-ix-breaks-dragon-quest-sales-records

Could you please verify this information? Prima.philosophia=D 01:40, 9 August 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prima.philosophia (talk • contribs)

DQIII was the top selling DQ game in 2000 is right. DQIII was sold 3.77 million copies in Famicom, 1.36 million for Super Famicom and 0.61 million for Game Boy, totally 5.74 million has been sold in Japan. Though DQIX was shipped 5.3 million in global as the sources you provided, but for single platform, DQIX is the top selling DQ both in Japan and global game. But all platforms of DQV was sold 6.27 copies in Japan: 2.79 million for Super NES, (1.80+0.19) million for PS2 and (1.30+0.17) million for DS. Source--Wangxuan8331800 (talk) 11:55, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon Quest III's job system inspired Wizardry VI and VII?[edit]

This information seems to be wrong. The page the provided link leads to contains no information whatsoever stating that Wizardry VI and VII were influenced by Dragon Quest III's job system. I can't find information stating this anywhere, so I have removed it until someone can provide a concrete source for this information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silver Will, Golden Wings (talk • contribs) 12:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Composer[edit]

The town music seems to have been adapted from part of Légende, Op. 17 by Henryk Wieniawski. It doesn't appear to be an entirely original composition, although it could be a really weird coincidence. 63.155.34.117 (talk) 20:00, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why not she for the sake of convenience?[edit]

The hero of the game can be either male or female. Currently, the plot summary notes that it will refer to the hero as "he" for the sake of convenience. Given that this is arbitrary, why not she? I'd also be perfectly happy using singular they. I would accept "he/she" "his/her" as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:601:101:5D30:C9F9:E1D3:E29C:52DC (talk) 06:07, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dragon Quest III. 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) 20:36, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dragon_Quest_III&oldid=1207031250"