Talk:Metal Warriors

History
I'm not very good with editing and I'm afraid that I'd totally botch the page if I tried, but it's woefully incorrect and based off of internet lore more than unbiased fact. The game was designed by Dean Sharpe and Mike Ebert, who later went off to form Big Ape Studios.

It was not developed by NCS and it was not, at any point, called Assault Suits Gideon. The only other name it went by while in development was, "Battle Droids".

There's a little post on the forums of The Lost Levels (a pretty nice site that does lots of research into this stuff and debunks internet game myths) here: http://forums.lostlevels.org/viewtopic.php?t=389

Metal Warriors: The Phantom Menace
Something that I've observed (and I'm sure many others have as well) is that the Ballistic armor from the game bears more than a passing resemblance to the Destroyer Droids in Star Wars: The Phantom Menace. I don't know if you could say that Star Wars copied the game, since both are Lucasarts productions after all. But my question is: is this little tidbit significant enough to add to this article?


 * Speaking of meaningless aditions, is the fact it looks like a retouched carbon copy (gameplaywise and technologywise) of Cybernator notable? 200.255.137.221 18:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I too noticed the likeness between the battle droids and cybernator's gameplay but one more likeness seemed to be much more striking. It seems to draw very heavily from Mobile Suit Zeta Gundam and Char's Counterattack. The first scene in the game looks very much like the first scene in Zeta gundam. Some of the images in the cutscenes look identical to promotional images for the two shows. The bridge of your ship looks very much like that of the Ra Cailum. The boss you run into a few times looks similar to the Quin mantha (http://www.mahq.net/Mecha/gundam/zz/nz-000.htm). There are many other similarities and If I had the ability to take pictures (not sure how to do that with an SNES, outside emulation) then I could make some side-by-side comparisons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.127.8.149 (talk) 17:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Metal-WarriorsCover.jpg
Image:Metal-WarriorsCover.jpg 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 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 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 22:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Verb Tenses?
Almost the entire article is written in past tense. Since the game is not an historic event and all information still applies to the game today, it should be written in present tense, should it not? I don't have time to change all of that, but somebody definitely should. -Jacquismo 03:26, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Release date:
Nintendo's release date pdf lists this game as getting an April 1995 release. This page listed Feb 1995. The magazines reviewed this game in April and May, which means I believe the April date is correct. Why would they wait months to review a game that came out months ago?

This also means that any source that says the game came out in Feb 95 is suspect since they're just copying from Wiki.

Oh, and first talk page comment in TEN YEARS! Woo hoo! Harizotoh9 (talk) 23:13, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Total score:
I'm not familiar with Total, so what does their score of "Fazit: 2+" mean? Harizotoh9 (talk) 11:41, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Expansion
Thanks for expanding this. This has been on my "to do" list for like 3 years and I never got around to it. Additionally, mobygames lists a review from Flux magazine. Harizotoh9 (talk) 18:07, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I tried looking for that one but to no avail. I strongly believe that the game was reviewed somewhere by Super Play magazine... Roberth Martinez (talk) 18:39, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Flux doesn't look like a terribly in-depth mag, but their review score should be listed at least. Note that MG converts all scores to out of 100 regardless of whatever it was. Since this was a NA only release, it's very likely that we can get 100% of all the mag reviews for this game. For Super Play, very likely the reviewed it as they were running out of proper releases to review in 95-96, so they covered a lot of import games. They even had a hilarious 5 page review of Front Mission Gun Hazard trashing the game.
 * Also, I'm not 100% sure how to render GameFan review scores. They use a format like Famitsu but they don't list a total. Sega Saturn Magazine uses a system like this, but they add a score out of 10 that's the average. Later on, GameFan would list their own scores but they use /100 format. Harizotoh9 (talk) 18:51, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Found a Nintendo Power 6-8 page guide (the page numbering is weird, since the last page is 34, there's several more pages of guide, but the next numbered page is 35). This and the Super Game Power guide pretty much cover the entire game in a lot of depth for anything we might need. Also, the Nintendo task force are for games and systems published and developed by Nintendo, and this is neither. Harizotoh9 (talk) 19:17, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

The Nintendo power page numbering is odd. Several pages after 34 are not numbered, and if you count them you'd get page 37 as the last page. However, if you continue, you'll find that the next numbered page is 35, and it's a separate article called "Epic Center".

The game is quite rare, and that should be mentioned. Only 50,000 copies were made. I happened to have bought an original in March 1995. If I remember right, this is covered in the Secret history of Japanese game devs vol 2. They also interview some of the guys behind Cybernator, and they comment on Metal Warriors. Harizotoh9 (talk) 21:41, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Focusing on the game itself will be enough. The development of Cybernator needs to go directly into its article. Roberth Martinez (talk) 18:01, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

There's the Retro Gamer source which says it's a common misconception that the game is a sequel to Cybernator. There's also SuperGamePower #020 that says that Gun Hazard is similar to past games like Cybernator and Metal Warriors. I guess that oculd be used to mention that all games are similar? I don't know. However, I've yet to see a source that says "spiritual successor", and it shouldn't be referred to as such until there's a source that specifically uses that word.

HG101 is a pretty weak source, and should be avoided if possible. I know technically Kurt's articles are RS, but still, when you have to make an exception that says 90% of the site's content is not reliable, that means the source is still pretty shaky. And even I've found errors in Kurt's articles. Like he claimed in the Cocoron article that Little Samson was directed by Akira Kitamura.

Also, I added the review score from Super Console, and a quick note on that. The 100 issue includes a list of the last 100 issues, and includes the review scores for all the games they've reviewed. So it's a RS for that review, and which mag it took place it, but it doesn't give more info than the score. Definitely should be added because we can aim for 100% complete review listings for this game, as it's NA only meaning the reviews are only going to be NA + Euro import reviews. I doubt any Japanese would have reviewed it. Harizotoh9 (talk) 19:32, 30 May 2019 (UTC)