Talk:Sabre Wulf

Removal
I've moved the following bit from the article to here as I'm not at all convinced it's proven/provable, having visited the reference. If anyone other than an actual Spectrum can decipher Spectrum data just by listening to it then they're obviously cleverer than me. Still, it would certainly be worth including if true, so I'll leave it here for now until someone can prove it.  Mi re ma r e  09:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The tape loading noise of Sabre Wulf was used as the sound effect of an expensive new XRF machine on CSI: Miami'' (season 1, episode 13, "Bunk"). Ref:http://matt.west.co.tt/spectrum/csi-miami''
 * It's not a question of deciphering, because a Spectrum's tape output is not encrypted or otherwise specially encoded. There is PC software that reads it, such as ZX Spectrum emulators, but a person cannot tell what the data is... --84.250.188.136 (talk) 04:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)


 * This might be based on the fact that certain modem carrier tones sound very similar to the ZX loading signal. Back in my BBS days I rememebr a similar thread claiming that a ZX loading signal could be heard being transmitted by (or being received by - I forget which) Vjer in the final few minutes of Star Trek: The Motion Picture   a_man_alone (talk) 19:52, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Package
I was looking for information about the game's original packaging for the Spectrum. Is it a Knight Lore -type black box or a smaller case? Also, is the "mobile phone" in the platform list supposed to be some kind of a joke or wat? --84.250.188.136 (talk) 04:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It was a Knight Lore-type black box. I'm pretty sure that I've still got it at my parents' place.  All Ultimate titles from Sabre Wulf to Nightshade were in those boxes.  From Gunfright onwards they reverted to large format (double capacity) plastic cassette boxes.  And prior to Sabre Wulf it was all single capacity cassette boxes.  I believe that the Commodore 64 titles Staff of Karnath and Entombed were the same.  Hope this helps, --Plumbago (talk) 07:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * "Mobile phone" shouldn't be there, I've removed it. The mobile version of Sabre Wulf is a conversion of the later GBA game of the same name.  Mi re ma re  17:28, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Crash bug
I would think that a magazine describing a bug as breaking one of the four cardinal directions of movement would qualify as "game-breaking" without exaggeration. In any event, I watered it down. – czar   00:00, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The sentence read as if the game was unplayable in two-player mode, which was not true. Only joystick control was broken, it still could be played with keyboard; if any, it would have been "playing-with-a-joystick-breaking". The current version is better. Diego (talk) 06:17, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Dingo (1983)?
In the final paragraph of the Reception section there's currently a reference to a title named Dingo, ostensibly by Ultimate. I'm not aware of any such title, nor is there a Wikipedia article on it. Anyone have any ideas? --P LUMBAGO 08:20, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Plumbago, Dingo was an arcade only game by ACG licensed from Jaleco. Fairly low-key compared to stuff like Donkey Kong, but it looks a lot like Sabre Wulf, at least at first glance.
 * Dingo at Arcade History
 * Remake at Tardis.dk
 * Chaheel Riens (talk) 09:32, 22 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Ah-ha. That explains that. Cheers! --P LUMBAGO 13:43, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Flip screen edit
You can't ask for support on the article then frantically revert every edit made to it in response!

"the prose should be accessible to people unfamiliar with jargon like "flip-screens", and this is the compromise"
This is the whole point of having wikilinks. If the reader is unfamiliar with a term (or we think they may be unfamiliar with one) - we link to it so they can understand it better. We don't clutter up the article itself by detailing or summarising the linked term.

Moreover, by splitting the definition of the maze into two paragraphs - you've now reverted to a definition of the flip screen maze in one paragraph, and then in the second paragraph the description of the 16x16 flip-screen makeup of the maze. If you want clear prose, then surely it would be better to consolidate the maze composition into the one paragraph, rather than split it into two sentences across two paragraphs?

And as a final point, the existing prose of "...he loads in the corresponding continuation of the maze" has to be about the most jargon-esque statement I've ever read outside of a technical manual. Sabreman doesn't load in anything. That's just bad phrasing.

"scripted bosses not in body of article"
Yes they are: "indigenous people, sleeping hippos, and a fast wolf" are mentioned, admittedly not as "bosses" and the natives get two mentions, one as before, and also as a hint "Personal Computer Games found one such tip: that the indigenous enemies will play a sound when they align both horizontally and vertically with a piece of the amulet."

Incidentally, this tip is obviously wrong even though it's sourced: they chatter when horizontally or vertically aligned - unless they were actually on top of the amulet it's impossible to align with both axis, and that would be no help at all. Chaheel Riens (talk) 11:23, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * (1) I assume you'd know through the BRD process that editors propose a change and the change is either left or further modified or otherwise brought to discussion, but there certainly isn't any "frantic revert" happening. (2) "Flip-screens" are indeed jargon in that they are terms a reader unfamiliar with the game would expect to be explained. If you don't like "corresponding continuation of the maze", feel free to rephrase it but that's not jargon. (3) Clarity comes from unfolding in a natural order. The first paragraph is about the game's basic mechanics—the reader doesn't need all maze-related details shoved into the same paragraph. The second paragraph goes into more reasonable detail after the basic premise is finished. (4) If the sources don't distinguish the enemies as bosses (regardless of whether they call them bosses), then we don't distinguish them as bosses either. I think I found a compromise for the "indigenous enemies" part. (5) If you have time to give a substantive review with the FA criteria, I suggest that you do so at the FA review page. That would be the best place to discuss whether it's necessary to define "flip-screen", etc. Appreciate your feedback, czar  17:40, 23 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't dispute that flip screen isn't jargon - that's why we wikilink, so that people can understand these terms. I thought I'd made that clear?  I'm also familiar with BRD, which is why I brought the "D" part up here, rather than reverting you again.  However, with regard to the bushfire if you really wish to claim BRD then I'm actually reverting your change made here a day ago when you removed the term.  Technically that makes you in breach of BRD, not me!
 * Clarity comes from being clear. That can be done by condensing all the necessary details about the maze construction into a couple of sentences, rather than spreading them out over two different paragraphs.
 * I'm pleased you accept the PCG article being incorrect - I still maintain that it's also incorrect to say that the red orchid slows down Sabreman. While he does move slower than the normal "sprint", the pace moved is the same as the one when wielding the weapon - ie one of the standard moving speeds in the game.
 * I don't think I've ever commented on potential featured articles before - all I have is this link Featured article candidates/Sabre Wulf/archive1 is that what you mean? Chaheel Riens (talk) 18:28, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Indestructible bush fire

 * You added the fire as "indestructible" last year—it had the same issues then. Please revert your edit—a "sentient fire" is no more helpful in that sentence...) As for PCG being incorrect, I think the best solution is often to simplify the point a source attempts to make if there is a possibility that a nuance of it is incorrect. In light of that, I had already removed the red orchard slow-down part. Yep, that's the link, and the criteria is at WP:FACR. czar  18:34, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You wanted sourced entries, now you have them. Can't have it both ways you know.  I may have added the indestructible word initially, but there's a much bigger time difference between that addition and your removal compared to your removal and my re-addition - or reversion as it was.  The fire is sentient in this context - it seeks out the player, and also it is indestructible, playing the game shows this.  Under the circumstances the act of playing the game counts as a reliable primary source, as well as the retro gamer article.  Don't be pointy.  You may consider yourself to be passionate about this article, but so do I.  You may feel that my edits are not improving the article - as is your right - but I may feel exactly the same way about your edits.  Chaheel Riens (talk) 19:34, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Let's see what the other reviewers say about the sentient fire, and I'll invite a third opinion if nothing comes up organically czar  21:08, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I suggest "indestructible" as an alternative. It's evidenced by the gameplay, and clarifies an important part of the gameplay - the fire takes the role of Evil Otto to prevent the player from simply staying in one screen and farming the creatures for points.  Chaheel Riens (talk) 22:53, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * We've already talked this out and I've already explained why I'm opposed to adding the adjective (it isn't in the source and it isn't necessary/helpful for understanding the game). If it was important to mention, at least one source would have done so. Outside reviewers will chime in soon enough. czar  00:06, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

No - the opposition to removing the adjective, not to adding it. It was present, then you removed it, and I reverted. It doesn't need to be in the source as the gameplay counts as a primary source.
 * Added here on 12/12/15
 * removed here on 22/11/16 - 11 months later
 * removal reverted here on 23/11/16 - 24 hours later

It's important to specify the bushfire as being indestructible as it puts it in a different class of enemies to the regular spawns.

As per BRD then let's revert to the original version before the bold edit that took it out, and wait for other reviewers to comment on whether its removal is justified. Chaheel Riens (talk) 12:04, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't really know anything about this particular game, but I really don't think gameplay information can be sourced to the gameplay itself, as it requires interpretation and insight into how the game works, and reeks of original research.--IDVtalk 12:17, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Here's your source, courtesy of Your Spectrum, Issue 6, in their "Cry of the WULF" feature: "staying in one room for too long causes an indestructible flame to start licking at your boots; you can avoid that by exiting and re-entering the room every so often."
 * As soon as I figure out the esoteric reference section used in this article, I'll add it in. Chaheel Riens (talk) 19:55, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Sabrewulf in Killer Instinct
I noticed a few years ago that this game and the werewolf from Rare’s Killer Instinct fighting game share a name (and spelling).

I have not played the original and am not sure if it’s meant just as a reference or is canonically related. There is no mention of this game on the Killer Instinct wiki.

I’ve added a notation to this effect under the Legacy section. Hobbesdream (talk) 19:54, 14 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi there, this is noted in the hatnote at the top of the article. Unless reliable sources cover the connection between the two, there is nothing sourced to warrant mention in the article itself. czar  05:27, 15 October 2022 (UTC)