Talk:WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2008/Archive 7

Armando
I have this game for PS2 and Ive beat it all the way through and I have not seen Armando anywhere in the game. I thought he would be the GM for ECW but that is Tommy Dreamer, then I thought he would be a manager but I couldnt find him when I tried to make him a manager for Umaga. So I was wondering is he exclusive to the XBOX 360 or the Wii or something like that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.88.127.189 (talk) 17:50, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

on the PS2 If you play in 24/7 mode and go as John cena, pick Umaga as your contender for the title, Armando Estrada will manage him in one of his matches on Raw.172.159.26.152 (talk) 17:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I went through the 24/7 mode with Booker T so thats probably why I didnt see Armando. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.117.49.133 (talk) 19:24, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

There is another way to see armando. Go to 24/7 mode pick any superstar then switch to RAW complete one year as campion. Then when you start again still on RAW He will give you messege if you want to fight Umaga. Accept then you will see him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.230.214.237 (talk) 17:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Roster
Can someone add a roster sheet to this page since the game has been released and now the whole roster is confirmed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.117.53.19 (talk) 17:08, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Soundtrack in prose?
Why us the soundtrack written in prose??? The soundtrack should be a list. Hiphopchamp 17:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It's an encyclopedia that "anyone" can edit, and as such, is meant to be totally inaccesible and incomprehensible to the lowly street rat. Or you could say that because it is in fact an encyclopedic article and not IGN, there's some sort of strange rationale that doesn't benefit anyone that has been decided. Oh well, tough luck eh? --Kaizer13 (talk) 23:52, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Again, Embedded lists states: "In an article, significant items should be mentioned naturally within the text rather than merely listed." Please direct all smarmy remarks about the guideline to Wikipedia talk:Embedded list. God forbid we should actually have standards on Wikipedia. The fascists! We surely shouldn't have to read prose - goodness knows I do enough of that every day as it is. : P --Jtalledo (talk) 23:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Matches
The type of matches are entered only need linking & Ordering —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chileno.s21 (talk • contribs) 16:21, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Changing focus
i just played the game and i couldn't manually change the focus of my character, but it was done automatically whenever i got close to an opponent. maybe this should be noted? J.C. (talk) 04:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * All the Smackdown games have been like that, you have to cange the settings in the options menu. Don.-.J 16:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * This isn't a tech help forum, and you should try to actually play it before you answer Don. For some reason, Yuke's have taken that feature away, probably because Yuke's is controlled by Soviet spies bankrolled by TNA. --Kaizer13 08:54, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It may not be a help forum but that is a good question. I'm lost about it too. If changing your target isn't featured in the game, to me, a long time fan of the SD! Series, it is notable. Put a quick sentence in the Gameplay section if it's true. I hope not. Ladder4321 11:54, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Unlockable?
Are Stephanie, Jillian etc... actually available on any of the consoles? CandiceWalsh (talk) 17:50, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Roster List/table
The roster section on this article is extremely messed up. I propose we make a list, so it can be more organized. It's not important who returns from WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2006 or WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2007, or the series mainstays like past lists have done. Tech43 (talk) 22:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree. It is extremely hard to read. 207.69.137.40 (talk) 16:13, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * A cluttered list isn't helpful in my view. Just because it was done one way for a while, doesn't mean every article must look the same. As for the attribute rating: that's game guide content and not encyclopedic. RobJ1981 (talk) 09:14, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Rob, Make me the 3rd person to vote (not including the person who made it a list originally) to change the roster list to an actual list. Where in any encyclopedia, is a roster list, soundtrack or any type of list written in paragraphical format? We don't need background info on who has been in the game before. it's irrelevant to the current game and its encyclopedia article. And by the way, none of the information is sourced AND you're the only one against it. So unless you can drum up more than one person against the change, then we HAVE consensus. Angrymansr (talk) 18:16, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Consensus can change, and it's only been a few days. Have a better attitude and let others comment before you determine that a list is preferred way to discuss the roster. Are you going to change the roster each time the consensus changes? All things for an article aren't just determined the moment you feel like they should be. RobJ1981 (talk) 19:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Here's my vote to change it back to the list. I disagree with Rob, the way it is now is NOT as readable as the 2007 version of the game.  @Rob - just because YOU like it in a paragraph doesn't mean it has to STAY that way.  ArcAngel (talk) 20:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Consensus is magically going to change with this article, when there has been concensus on this formatting for years? Almost every single WWE Wrestling game that has a Wiki article has the roster as a list. Go look for yourself. List of WWE Wrestling games. One rogue editor isn't going to change that. There is no single logical reason that it needs to be a paragraph, other than you like it. You have yet to give a single reason to keep it as is, yet you keep reverting the change. Angrymansr (talk) 19:40, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The current format is difficult to decipher and sloppy, it is not clear and concise. Lists are made so that it can be glanced at quickly and understood. This section does not accomplish that.
 * It's the standard for WWE video game articles, as well as any sports-type roster
 * None of the information is sourced
 * Most of this section is just fluff. Historical information about who's been in what other games does not contribute to the current article. The article spends more time on other games, then it does getting to the point of who is actually in the game. Does any one care that you can unlock Vince McMahon's bald attire when looking for a game roster? Like you said, that's strategy guide stuff.
 * Where was consensus when you and Jtalledo decided to change it from a list to prose while MANY other users voiced their desire to have it otherwise?
 * While we're at it, let's make the In-game arenas and soundtrack sections paragraphs too! We can talk about how the Smackdown Arena is making it's 13th consecutive appearance in a WWE game. That would be compelling reading. Angrymansr (talk) 19:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * if this is such a big deal, make a sortable wikitable with the superstars and the platforms they are available on?? If not make a list and make a note on the side with the platforms they are on, if none of that works leave it as it is. If this turns into an edit war, you guys will be blocked... Tr U cO 93 11 TaLk / SiGn 20:53, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

And yet people STILL continue to revert back to that stupid block of text. WE DON"T WANT IT. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DonJuan.EXE (talk • contribs) 00:26, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * A list is the way to do it. Just because it's the new game does not mean it should be treated any diffrently. Oh, and Rob, you really don't need to be a jerk to everyone every freaking time you don't get your way. Tech43 (talk) 20:58, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * A table would work too. Anything but what we have right now. Tech43 (talk) 21:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The decision has been made to add a table instead of a list. Tech43 (talk) 21:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Soundtrack
Why is the Soundtrack gone from the page?? Derrty2033 (talk) 03:06, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Good question. I was searching for the soundtrack earlier today, and to my surprise, the article didn't have it. I had to write down the songs by hand over a three hour period; very annoying. I think it should be put back, if someone took it out.74.236.41.140 (talk) 10:29, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Chris Benoit in roster
From Chris Benoit double murder and suicide: "He was also removed from the WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2008 video game after originally being included as a playable wrestler."

This fact isn't referenced in the article and isn't mentioned here, either. Can someone verify this? --M4gnum0n (talk) 16:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I havent seen any actual proof he was part of the game ever. Rumors say he was, but we can't go by rumors. I'm sure many others were in the game originally, and taken out. It's a bit hard to believe they stick with one roster for the game throughout all of the development of it. RobJ1981 (talk) 21:00, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * There was pictures of Benoit in the game before his death, he was putting Triple H in the crossface. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.141.147.89 (talk) 04:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

PS2 Online?
According to THQ the PS2 version of the game is playable online, but I can't find out how...

Would anyone happen to know?

-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.135.1.208 (talk) 14:35, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Consensus Time
Alright, one day I wondered who was included in the new WWE game SmackDown vs. Raw 2008, so where better to look for this information than Wikipedia? "Elsewhere," according to another editor.

I actually had a challenging time finding the complete roster of this game, which resulted in me visiting IGN via Google and looking at the Wii version's roster, piecing together info from that page with the text on wiki - the mass amount of text on wiki. I decided to incorporate the 'Roster' section into a more concise piece, beneficial to everyone and skipping an amount biased trivial parts that were present before, such as the last time [certain] characters were featured in a game, what clothes they wear and how many teeth Bobby Lashley has, as well as vague paragraphs in particular the last one about the NPCs (ironically, it looks more like a massive game guide now than what it did before I was reverted). Not only that, but the revision was to keep the article in synch with the others of its kind, like WWE SmackDown! vs. Raw 2006 which was a featured article. So...'Arenas', directly beneath the Roster section, is written in a similar style aswell, and what I am proposing is that the 'Roster' section presents...well...useful and not the jigsaw it is now.

Dlae │  here  19:58, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * This seems to be a fight that can't be won because of a minority of folks will disagree with your thesis on this matter. ArcAngel (talk) 20:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, let me put out WP:IGNORE here and those who seem to concur a few sections up ('Roster list/table'), as well as the fact that the section in the article itself, effectively, still remains a list. Dlae  │  here  20:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Try gamefaqs or do another google search, I'm sure you will find a roster list that you like. I find it very hard to believe, you think there is no good roster lists out there. In my view, a prose is the way to go. There is no rule saying "all wrestling articles must have a list form of playable wrestlers". Also, I want to point out: a NPC list isn't useful and doesn't belong in the article. Look at just about any good video game article, and you will see there is no such list. A complete list of everyone in the game for "completeness" sake isn't useful or encyclopedic. If you want a guide of every little detail: visit a gaming site, this is an encyclopedia. Also, the arena list is basically a level guide, look at just about any good video game article and you wont see that listed either. In the gameplay section, the arenas should be discussed but all shouldn't be listed. I'm currently in the process of fixing up all wrestling articles to look decent and encyclopedic, instead of a fan's guide to every little detail in list clutter form. I'm hoping some people can help me out, instead of refusing to accept change. RobJ1981 (talk) 21:49, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * On a side note, a list just clutters up articles and stylistically doesn't look good. -- bullet proof  3:16 04:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

This is absurd at this point. Consensus to make this roster a list has been reached over and over again. Yet the consensus continues to be ignored and any attempt to have the article comply with consensus has been reverted. It is the opinion of only two users to keep it prose. The act of many editors attempt to convert this to a list constantly being reverted by one editor is disruptive, teetering on vandalism, and plain old annoying. Angrymansr (talk) 19:40, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, if the reverting user(s) would just leave it alone, this wouldn't even be an issue. Sadly, all they see is their "agenda" for the article.  Sad.  ArcAngel (talk) 19:45, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Another perfect example of good editing being ignored due to the ego of a minority of users. No surprise, but still a disappointment. --Kaizer13 (talk) 17:13, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

False information in article
"A glitch which has frustrated many fans is the fact that if playing as a created wrestler, in the Road to Wrestlemania portion and is in possession of the title, they are asked if they want to relinquish the title, yet the story continues as if they chose to relinquish the title, preventing the player from completing WWE 24/7 Mode."

This excerpt from the article is false. I tested it first-hand and experienced no glitch. Additionally, I searched the internet and found no testimony of other players experiencing it, and found no sources testifying to the accuracy of this claim.

Stop deleting this discussion post or I will report you as a vandal.

"Please note that this Talk page is for discussion of changes to the WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2008 article. This is not a forum"

I am trying to discuss a problem the article. I am not attempting to discuss the game itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.236.41.140 (talk) 02:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes I know now, anyway. I guess it can be removed from the article if you tested it and can't find any sources to prove it.-- T r U C o 9 31 1 02:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Truco, I should've made it clearer that the paragraph was in the article then this misunderstanding wouldn't have happened. I'll have to make an account before I edit the page, and I think it'll take four days before I'm allowed to, so if anyone else wants to remove the false paragraph before me go ahead.74.236.41.140 (talk) 02:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I auctually had this glitch but it wasnt just that, just about everything I chose didnt happen. But it had no affect of me completing the game. It just took a little longer to complete it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.141.147.89 (talk) 04:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * IT has been removed. T r U C o 9 31 1 04:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

No offence but if he has a genuine reason to discuss, then why shouldnt he do this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.241.21 (talk) 19:05, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Can someone post all the wrestlers Featured in SvR 08?
Can someone post all the wrestlers Featured in SvR 08? ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.21.154.110 (talk) 05:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No, It has been done before and was reverted.  Stormin' Foreman    Got something to say?  06:53, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes but now it will remain. -- T r U C o 9 31 1 23:47, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

No 24/7 ECW
should it be noted that on 24/7 with a superstar u can't join ecw —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.25.175.188 (talk) 04:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)