Talk:Ragnarok Online 2: The Gate of the World

Release Date verification
The release date of early 2007, which I have updated the article with, can be found on, 7th paragraph, second sentence from the bottom of that paragraph. It can also be found on in the last paragraph. It can also be proven yet again from here. It is the last bullet in the "Highlights of Financial and Business Update" section around the middle of the paragraph. I also removed the information under "Version". Version is not the date of beta. I also deleted the older parts of the discussion page, since they are no longer needed and way too outdated to be of any use. --A Pair of Shoes 14:07, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Article Clean-up Finished 5/28/06
I've finished my duty on the article here. Every section was redone and organized. After doing research, I have found that the "Main Features" section is a direct rip from A Ragnarok Tale. That will need to be redone late (Unless ART doesn't mind us using it.) --A Pair of Shoes 15:14, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

The parts mentioned above have been changed quite a bit, so I've decided to remove the quotes. --A Pair of Shoes 06:02, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Private Server Emulators
I have, yes, again deleted the emulator links and information in the article. I would also recommend that you please do not add them again.

For all that Private Servers are to Ragnarok Online, there is no mention of them on it's article (Except 2 places). Why? Because it is not relevant to providing a user with information about RO. Even more so when the emulator in question doesn't even exist yet. It's simply a third party website with no information that can't benefit the article by being in the external links or on the article itself. Please see External_links for more information.

Furthermore, though you may think not, when your links can provide a emulator, it will be a illegal program. Wikipedia cannot link to illegal content or the like, and thus your link cannot be on Wikipedia. I don't honestly care to hear your nonsense on how the subject in question is legal, because quite simply it isn't. If you would like to hire some legal persons to interpret the legality of the situation, then be my guest.

And lastly, please remember that anything you put on Wikipedia can and probably will be edited by others. That is what the website is for. I have as much right to delete anything as you do to add it.

If you still want your content to be on Wikipedia, you can always just make a seperate article for it yourself. Thats what eAthena did, and I'm happy to see that Saga did this as well. Oh! One more thing. The author of a program or owner of a website can't add his own links or content to Wikipedia. The conent has to be added by a neutral POV. Another reason why it's being deleted.

Cheers --A Pair of Shoes 17:55, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Preview Site
The official RO2 English "Preview" site is now up. http://www.ragnarok2.co.kr/eng/main.html Resplendent 14:29, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Norman?
I see that the explanation for the Norman race's name is that "The name is likely a portmanteau of the words "normal" and "human."". I suggest that perhaps the name could be a reference to the Normans or even the Norsemen of Europe, which would probably make a lot more sense (Northern European peoples) given that the games' mythos is mostly Norse-based.

--AVX 07:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree, that makes much more sense then what is currently in the article. --A Pair of Shoes 03:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not getting how stats are leveling.
Are base stats going to be fixed, fixed by class, or distribruited? This article doesn't specify, but i assume the last choice is true, seeing how that's how it was in the origional game.

-- MikedaSnipe -- 11:40 Pacific Standard Time

To the best of my knowledge, the stats are still distributed but do not matter as much as in the original game. When more information is released on the finer points of the game, we can update the article in the respective spots. --A Pair of Shoes 00:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I was able to play around a bit with the Korean client on a private server (guess I'll admit it :/) and it is distributed just like the first game. However, this game is still in its very early stages so it may not end up exactly as the first game. AVX 16:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Updates on CB2
Someone willing to update this article now that we have information on closed beta 2? :p Information can be found here (in Korean): --Haruyasha 06:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Clone section- Complex Job Change System
There were two sections in this article entitled "Complex Job Change System" under Main Features, which was a clone of the other section. I took the liberty of deleting the duplicate section. Mitcjase 01:35, 26 March 2007 (UTC)Mitcjase

Release date misleading
release dates read 2007, added "(expected)" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FranzSS (talk • contribs) 03:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC).

Link Deletion?
Excuse but someone is constantly removing the link that I provide in the Useful Link Section. (www.ro2hq.uni.cc)

The website does NOT contain anything Illegal and contains Information that deals with this topic. (Rangarok Online 2)

Can someone please tell me if I am doing anything wrong? I am following the Rules and Guidelines that Wikipedia has Stated.

Thank you for your time Kuburaisu 02:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

In order to be linked, a website has to offer information that the article itself does not have. www.ro2hq.uni.cc offers no such information. Also, as I'm guessing it's your website, a neutral point of view must add the site in order for it to be valid. --A Pair of Shoes 07:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Article Cleanup
Article needs a bit of cleaning up. There is old information that needs to be changed. (I went ahead and updated CB3 stuff.) Gravity released their new website, thus resulting in breaking all of the reference links in this article that point to Ragnarok 2's home page. -Haruyasha 07:06, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Verifying information within the article
I'm adding a to the article as a great deal of it has no references on which to fall back on. I know it's an unreleased game but almost everything gives the appearance that it came out of nowhere. There's not even an English gaming publication reference, not one. There's only links to the official website and three fansites, one of which has limited information (more like unreferenced speculation) on the game. - AVX 20:15, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Theres simply no links to reference that are in English; The game is non-existent to almost all English sources except fansites. Theres nothing we can really do about it. --A Pair of Shoes 02:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I know, which is why I put the . Until there is information it should be noted that most of it comes from people who play the game and tell us their experience. However an anonymous editor removed the tag and left no comment on it, which is why I am restoring it since the person who did it did not have the courtesy to discuss it. - AVX 18:32, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:LogoRO2.jpg
Image:LogoRO2.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 06:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Fixed --A Pair of Shoes 16:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

no mage or elementalist class?
I don't see any job class that is focused towards elemental attacks, like how the Mage class was in RO1. Anyone want to explain this, please? Jon Fawkes 02:16, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well there obviously isn't one at the moment.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 02:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Information is hard to come by at the moment. The game is still in its beta stages and things could change at any time. Rumours have indicated that Norman have an RO1-esque class system so a mage class may yet appear. - AVX 15:33, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, from open beta testing I've started to see that the Enchanter is a mage/priest/elemental class. --A Pair of Shoes 15:09, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Useful Information Abuse
The "Useful Information" section at the bottom with the external links is turning into a disgustingly obvious blog/fan site/forum plug with Google ads. Wikipedia is a not a place to advertise your fan sites and forums. Some of these links lead to a website that does not offer anything unique or useful that is not already found on the official website. Can the original author please review this? -- 71.42.119.69 12:40, 3 July, 2007 (UTC)


 * Alright, after reviewing the websites linked I've come to these conclusions using WP:EL as the basis.
 * http://www.ragnarok-tale.net/ offers artwork, scans, screenshots, videos, interviews, and a FAQ that are all unrepresented and implausible in the wiki article. Actually, several portions of the wiki article originally came from this site. I know that much as a fact when I first started working on this wiki forever ago. Also, the fact that it is single handedly the focal point for the english community of Ro2 warrants in my opinion it's inclusion in the article.
 * http://www.ro2db.org/ provides a resource of unquestionable inclusion by offering information on much of the games inner workings like skills and items. However, it's majority is outdated and supported by an illegal project. So I dunno what you think of that one or not.
 * http://www.ragnarok-online-2.com/ has almost no media at all, and even supports illegal operations for identity theft using Korean social security numbers. I do believe linking to that is against the rules, so nuff said?
 * http://www.ro2info.com/ requires registration to view anything on it's site, so it's immediately out.
 * http://www.ragnarok2.info/ offers an in depth look to most of the stuff on the Wiki. But sadly most of it is copied from this wiki anyways. In my opinion it should be removed until it has enough information (That isn't straight copy and pasted) to warrant inclusion.
 * http://www.ro-guardians.com/forums/Ragnarok-2-f498.html is a simple plug for a forum and should be removed.
 * The main problem is, I'll remove these now and a day later the site owners will just add them right back. Also, please sign your edits next time. -- A Pair of Shoes 01:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for looking into it. I'm just always annoyed by people taking advantage of wikipedia and the articles of other people who put time and work into them. I can imagine it takes several hours, if not days, to do the research and write an article, along with an indefinite amount of updates and revisions. Consequently, when I see someone who has contributed nothing to this article except for an external link to their website so they can get ad revenue, it's revolting. -- 71.42.119.69 16:41, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The link to the ragnarok-online-2 is a private server, from everything I can tell. It should not be linked here, especially since it looks too much like an official Ragnarok Online II website. X-Kal (talk) 01:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Speculation in Classes section
There is so much speculation in this article it makes me sick. RO2 may be a sequel of RO1 but it is not the same game. I would like to suggest that the statements in the article be kept more to things that are actually known.

Example:

" RO1, a swordsman could advance to either a Knight or Crusader at job level 40-50. The Knight, which is an improvement on the Swordsman's damage dealing ideal, relies on high damage skills. A Crusader, who is more of a battlemage, relies on a balance of both damage skills and buff skills. It is unknown at this point if the Knight or Crusader will be introduced into RO2. "

Completely uneccessary, and something you could learn by reading about RO1.


 * To be honest I added all that buffer simply to add substance to the classes section back in the start of the article. It hasn't changed at all since then, and does need a major overhaul of some sort. I'll work on it tomorrow if no one has gotten to it by then. Also, please sign your comment. --A Pair of Shoes 04:20, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

gameplay?
the article doesn't really say anything about how the game will actually play. Is it another grind-fest? No instanced dungeons? What if i've never played an mmorpg before? Ohemgee 21:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Advertising
theres a reference on about world of warcraft in the recruits class section, i think it should be removed or atleast changed to the class being similar to the gunslinger class in ragnarok online 1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HappyDragon (talk • contribs) 12:59, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Um...mentioning another game isn't "advertising"...—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 14:00, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

No agility?
I noticed that there was a recent revision that was undone, regarding agility as one of the stats. Being someone who hasn't the opportunity to play RO2 yet, is there no Agility stat in the game? If not, should we specify in the Stats section that, unlike the first Ragnarok, there is no Agility stat? It would certainly clear up some major ambiguity, especially for longtime Ragnarok followers. X-Kal (talk) 07:30, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Official Ragnarok 2 website
I'm wondering what is happening with the official Ragnarok 2 website. I keep seeing the ragnarok-online-2 website listed, but I am 100% certain that is a private server that should not be linked. Why? If it were the real thing, there would be more than the 33 users online at the time I'm writing this. They would not be asking for SVN translators, and they would not post strange emails not from a @gravity.co.kr email address, or it would at least look somewhat official. And finally, no English server will ever require or suggest the need for a Korean Social Security number. Does anyone have some insight that I am missing? X-Kal (talk) 03:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It is a private server. The official RO2 websites are http://www.ragnarok2.co.kr and http://www.ragnarokonline2.com (the latter appears down; it's up and down sporadically).  Anyway, removing that link was the right thing to do. --Resplendent (talk) 03:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Awesome. I did want to make sure that private server links stay out, but it's good to know I'm not stepping on any toes. Should we put the real English site back up, with the disclaimer that you mentioned (that it's up and down sporadically)? X-Kal (talk) 04:07, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Suppose it can't hurt. Would be nice if they got their act together and put up something a little more permenant though. --Resplendent (talk) 06:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

PVP
This bit of information needs to be removed as it is completely false, and on top of which it also lacks references: "including several age 18 and up only servers to accommodate those who wish to participate in a player versus player environment" -Haruyasha (talk) 05:32, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Release Dates
Release dates of all Ragnarok Online 2 was added on the right panel of this page. The dates are posted as 12/20/08 on each version. I do not think this information is true. If there is a reference to this release dates, it should be included in Game Status. If not, the release dates return to Unknown. Lhong1987 (talk) 12:48, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm fairly confident that these results are untrue - there have been many speculations, but nobody seems to have a clear citation. Plus - who really expects the regional servers to coordinate their release dates like this?  I suppose it's possible, but it's not likely. In either case, I've switched the release dates back to TBA until a reliable source comes along. X-Kal (talk) 15:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * China RO2 is in a state of stasis from Gravity being taken over by gungHo, as well as jRO2 shutting down on the 20th of August which i've read from the official site. not a word about RO2sea which i would presume are still in negotiations with gungHo as any other regional company seeking license, so until kRO2 actually updates and confirms to us they aren't just toking off the peace pipe, i'm changing the release dates to TBA. Zerocannon (talk) 02:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Please read before removing a large chunk of information...
I've noticed one of you had decided upon yourself to remove quite a bit of content from the article. While I do agree with some of the information removed (stats and technical information), I do not feel it was done with a careful eye.

The "Future" section had maybe one or two sentences talking about the game's future, with the rest of the information being about the game's current status, with a citation thrown in for good measure for goodness sakes. I was able to just change the heading to Current Status and reword that one sentence dealing about the future.

It seems to me that RO2 is advocating its race system as one of its main selling points (admittedly not yet live in the game), so I feel a stub on the Races is justified. Also it's fitting to have that section due to the picture showing the height comparison for the Ellr and Norman. For reference, note that the RO1 article here on Wikipedia has a stub on the Class system, which is one of the game's main selling points, so it seems to me that a brief and general section on the Race system that RO2 has (or will have) is justified. Ashe (talk) 06:55, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Plot vandalism ("...son of Baldr..." -> "...son of David Reynaldo Smith...")
This seems to be a reoccuring attempt at vandalism as I've been having to fix it for over a year now multiple times. Someone keeps changing Baldr to "David Reynaldo Smith." I've googled and I cannot find a single reference to him (not only related to RO2, just, well, anything in general). Baldr, on the other hand, is actually related to Norse mythology that Ragnarok Online is based on and actually has an article here devoted to him.Ashe (talk) 21:57, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Article needs complete Rewrite.
The game has been officially redone. http://www.ragnarok2.co.kr/ It now has a subtitle of "Legend of the Second", as well as removing just about everything that was in the original idea of RO2. http://www.gamebase.com.tw/news/news_content.php?sno=90005526&news_category=1 Anyone who can read...I think it's Taiwanese (for that news article) or Korean (For the main site), please see exactly what they have changed, and what they have kept if anything, and update the article correctly. I have no idea what is changed officially, but it seems like they are redoing just about everything. Polantaris (talk) 17:57, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * We'll probably have to wait until an English official site launches for enough information to properly rewrite it. --Resplendent (talk) 21:37, 2 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I think it would be better if this page stays like it is and we just work on the new one (Ragnarök Online 2: Legend of the Second). I personally would like all the history of the old game to remain on Wiki for everyone to see. This game has been through a lot of changes and all this info will only get harder to find later on. - An old RO fan  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.39.173.186 (talk) 05:30, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I have edited some of the article to reflect the new developments and agree we should have 2 different articles for the games as they appear to be completely separate. --Resplendent (talk) 06:59, 3 July 2010 (UTC)