Jump to content

Talk:Soulcalibur IV/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Cross Downloadable Characters?

The wiki currently states that in "179 of GameInformer magazine that 'Namco was nice enough to concede that the second characters may be available for download on the respective consoles at a later date.' " I've seen a number of people have been claiming that in the newest EGM (issue #229), that Namco has stated that the characters "...are exclusive to the respective consoles, and we intend to keep them separate." Can anyone clear this up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.199.116.161 (talk) 07:18, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Most likely it was just PR talk. Companies often claim something is exclusive, when infact they only mean for a period of time. Look at Star Ocean 4 and Tales of Vesperia for the 360, the developers mantain that they're exclusive to the 360, but I'm sure many people out there will be willing to put bets down for when the PS3 versions are announced. Same is likely true here, they're exclusive, but will almost definitely be made downloadable, at some point.92.21.73.176 (talk) 23:30, 25 June 2008 (UTC)


Cleaning up a bit

I edited out some assumptions from this article, like Sophitia's return and the new knight woman being a standard character (which is still uncertain). Citing sources and avoiding unbased rumors is really important in Wikipedia, people. SamSandy 06:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Great! I could not agree more. I mean come on.. assuring that strong (yet not stated sources) Imply that we are going to see characters from star wars and pirates of the carribean? Assume good faith? No... good faith and speculation is the same. Not stated, NOT ADDED.(some people seem to have trouble understanding that.193.71.156.193 18:34, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

the name is Soul Calibur

Not Soulcalibur. --HanzoHattori 23:02, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Someone do something about it. This is stupid. --HanzoHattori 07:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Not according to Electronic Gaming Monthly. Read the first paragraph of the article. King Zeal 12:44, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Namco has done this with other games in the series, and doesn't do much to clear up the issue, in my opinion. The logo certainly doesn't help. Even if Soulcalibur IV is the official naming, the other name may still be appropriate per WP:COMMONNAME. Just a thought. Dancter 17:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
The logo clearly reads "SoulCalibur" - just like the previous Soul Calibur games. (Actually, it is Soul Calibur Legends which is "Soulcalibur" by the logo featured - but the name on Wikipedia is ironically "Soul Calibur" anyway.) --HanzoHattori 08:08, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
So? --HanzoHattori 22:18, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
As I said, it was just a thought. No need to be combative. By citing WP:COMMONNAME, I was making a case for the "Soul Calibur" convention, which I thought was what you were advocating. Going by logo (which I'm not saying is definitive), it's not just Legends, but Soulcalibur III, as well. You wouldn't spell it SoulcalibuR just because the R is larger. Frequently in the trademark fine print of Namco pages, you'll see it spelled SOULCALIBUR or Soulcalibur. That was the case for Soul Calibur II. Dancter 22:51, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Legends is spelled "SoulcalibuR" in the logo - not SoulCalibur or SOULCALIBUR (but probably means "Soul Calibur" anyway). ANd so was the SCIII, yes. But I'm not about this - why THIS ARTICLE is still called "Soulcalibur IV"? (SIV? ScIV? I said, this is stupid.) Even while the series box says it's Soul Calibur IV. --HanzoHattori 02:34, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Every unaltered copy of the June 13 press release spells it "Soulcalibur IV". Dancter 03:15, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Jesus Christ. Are you going to change SCIII to "SOULCALIBUR III" too? Even Soul Calibur Legends is still SC. --HanzoHattori 09:59, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Just pointing out the facts. I've already expressed that that I am not opposed to the "Soul Calibur" format, but it's a bit unfair for you to characterize this issue as "stupid". Just because a user moved this article to Soulcalibur IV and Soul Calibur Legends remains as-is at the moment proves nothing either way.
There were lengthy debates on the naming of the PlayStation 3 article in light of the fact that the name is officially PLAYSTATION 3. It was still decided that "PlayStation 3" is the better place, per WP:COMMONNAME and MOS:TM.
The SOULCALIBUR format is probably just an anomaly (and even then wouldn't be appropriate for Wikipedia, per the guideline I just mentioned), but there is a legitimate case to be made that the "Soulcalibur" format may be correct. You keep insisting on that the page should be fixed on the basis that "Soul Calibur IV" is "correct", and I'm showing evidence otherwise. Nothing more. The users involved in the page moves were Clamticore and Michael Mad. You could always invite them to participate in this discussion. Dancter 17:36, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
They don't participate in this discussion because they don't want to. It's not my problem. They also changed without discussion. I'd fix it long time ago, but it's double redirect or whatever and I don't know how. I'm not Wiki-savy, I just write stuff and fix layout. Also EVERYTHING is now "Soulcalibur". Jesus. Whatever. --HanzoHattori 17:59, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

wow you are stressed out guys.. as for the shadow ninja especially —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.71.156.170 (talk) 20:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Playable characters

Folks, the official website has been updated with the inclusion of the characters, so it should be the number-one source for who's in and who's yet to be confirmed. Since Yoshimitsu isn't on that page (yet), I deleted his name from the list, even though I know his name has been mentioned in the article (and that he will most probably be in the game).SamSandy 21:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Good work... Some people thinks it is enough to "assume good faith" omg thats ridiculous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.71.156.170 (talk) 21:02, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

The Official site seems to be lagging behind in "updates" from time to time. If I remember correctly, when Yoshimitsu was originally added to the wiki, it was because he had been confirmed with at least two other characters, with actual screenshots and art, from that issue of Famitsu. The site wasn't updated with those characters for almost a week IIRC. So it is probably not in your best interest to use the official site as a be all end all for whats going on with this game. Instead you should try searching for then newest news updates and confirmations from japan. Famitsu has been a solid source of information for all of the character releases so far. 71.199.116.161 (talk) 01:59, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Yohimitsu was sometimes added to the Wikipedia article because he had been mentioned by the staff in an interview for 1up or EGM ('don't remember which one right now) months ago, but we hadn't seen him at all. No profile, no illustration, no CG model, nothing. Just a comment from some guy on the staff that implied he would be the game. He was just recently confirmed in FamiTsū (along with Talim and Rock), and added to the Japanese official site only two or three days after that (well... on the same day, officially, since the FamiTsū news broke a few days early, as usual). 88.161.129.43 (talk) 09:09, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Game Info-Translations

The official site has character profiles up for each of the confirmed characters, as well as what appears to be a basic plot synopsis. Would it be possible for someone to accurately translate these and include them on the page and under each respective character page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.156.98 (talk) 12:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Darth Vader and Yoda

Seriously, WTF?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.180.100.45 (talk) 23:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidently it's true. lol source one & source two. They have pictures. FaithLehaneTheVampireSlayer 23:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

However, it could be photoshopped by a devoted person. Unless Namco or anyone from it has confirmed it, I think we should probably take it off. Mythmonster2 (talk) 00:03, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

They were not the first to guest star in this series. So it's still plausible. FaithLehaneTheVampireSlayer 00:05, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
1up says they're the first to reveal this information. I'm willing to take their word for it, though confirmation from Namco would be nice. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 00:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
You can't just attribute everything to photoshoping though. For starters, finding models or screenshots in appropriate positions to photoshop in and then finding a screenshot in which they'll fit is enough of a pain without someone with a keen eye finding that one of the two elements used in the 'shopped' image are from somewhere else and point out the originals. Then there's the technical skill involved, it's hard to make something like like a CG model that looks like that. They aren't good enough to have been taken from the movies (Yoda isn't detailed enough and Darth Vader is CG instead of a man in a suit) and there aren't any recent Star Wars games with enough graphical detail to rip the models from. You'd have to alter the old in game models so that they look updated or alter the movie ones so they look like they're from a computer game. Not very many ams can make things like this from scratch, not to this level of detail either, unless they're either very accomplished or a pro. It's a lot more hassle than it's worth.
Also, there's now a video here. If you can attribute that to photoshopping, then I'll be damned. Because doing that would definitely take a shed load of image and video editing ability as well as 3D model manipulation ;) 83.100.183.200 (talk) 01:49, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
I edited the page since it stated in three different parts that Yoda & Vader are in. Quite unnecessary, don't you think? SamSandy (talk) 17:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Skeptical about Darth Vader and Yoda in SC4

That would have to be an anonymous, yet very accomplished Photoshop user. Weren't there complaints about some of the guest characters in Soul Calibur 2 (mostly McFarlane's creations) being out of place? Unless Namco states it, i'm not ready to believe about those Star Wars characters being in the game.

Azurada (talk) 01:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)Azurada

Namco just stated it (albeit not it written word). Check out the trailer at soulcalibur.com. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 02:06, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[1] Star Wars official website confirms it. 76.169.167.65 (talk) 02:23, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

32 Characters Confirmed?

In the recent 1UP Yours podcast, at the five minute mark where the begin discussing Soul Calibur IV, Garnett says that there were 32 character slots on the demo. Podcast link here: http://www.1up.com/do/minisite?cId=3149993 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.196.146 (talk) 23:59, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Makes sense. There are 25 mainstays, and 27/28 viable characters, including Hilde and Vader/Yoda (all depending on "exclusives", hello downloadable content!). Assuming all the main characters come back, and that there are no additional slots that are unlockable (ala Tekken and Smash), that leaves 4 or 5 new characters that can be announced. My money is on Amy and a random character, the other 3 are really anyones guess. Of course, this is all assuming those folks at 1UP are right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.215.10.1 (talk) 01:02, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, probably Amy, and Hwang and Li Long too. They were made part of the standard character roster in Soul Calibur III Arcade Edition, so they'll probably return for Soul Calibur IV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.251.80.22 (talk) 17:25, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Amy was confirmed today in a magazine scan, but that doesn't necessarily mean Hwang and Li Long are in too. We'll see... SamSandy (talk) 10:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
As it stands, 23 slots are taken. 9 slots left! However - Li Long, Hwang, Rock, Setsuka, Talim, Yoshimitsu have yet to be confirmed, along with the obligatory -Random- character. Assuming Li Long and Hwang aren't relegated to -Bonus Character- status again (I bet they are!), I'd say we're looking at 2 brand spanking new characters and a good deal of bonus characters for all the CAS classes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.215.10.1 (talk) 17:37, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Additional Character?

On the SoulCalibur Wiki, it mentions someone named Kain on the character roster. Can anyone confirm this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.249.20.210 (talk) 20:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like BS. 88.161.129.43 (talk) 21:35, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
The fact is, anybody can say "Hey, there's a guy called Kain in Soulcalibur IV", so you've got to be skeptical about these rumors. I usually go by magazine scans or official screenshots. When I see it, I believe it. SamSandy (talk) 10:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Character List

Okay, so why was the list of confirmed characters removed? I know it's somewhat repetitive with the text section (which is there for the sources), but it also serves those who want a quick check on who's in and who's not yet (something which is much more difficult to see from the text). It's all temporary, anyway, until we have the final roster confirmed... I wish such radical changes would be discussed here more. 19:13, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

My mistake, I missed the fact they were all referenced in the preceding paragraph. However, I removed the JP link as only the English language version of official sites should be included. Thanks. Fin©™ 19:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Why is that? Does it state that in one of Wikipedia's cazillion rules? XD The Japanese website has much more extensive coverage of the game than the English site, even though the text isn't understandable to most people. There are all those pretty pictures to see, nevertheless! SamSandy (talk) 20:58, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
The fact that's it's not understandable to most people should be reason enough! It states in the videogame article guidelines Only the English version of the page should be included if there are multiple languages.. Fin©™ 21:20, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Page Titles

This is being a little picky, but I've noticed that a lot of the character pages list the characters name with (Soul Calibur) afterwards, when the correct title of the game is Soulcalibur, as one word. The main game pages seem to have this correct but most of the subpages don't. Was this done on purpose, or should it be fixed? I just wanted to check with you guys before editing things. WinterSnowblind (talk) 23:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I say go ahead and make the change. A lot of these pages were made before the name change, and we've been too lazy/busy to change them. King Zeal (talk) 00:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The story of SC4 is based on -???- ending

In SC3, each character had 2 different endings with some inputs. Pressing gives you good endings and vice versa. Here in SC4, what is it's story based on? It would seem weird as, if everyone got a good ending, Nighty and Siegfried would be fighting X number of times until a Time Paradox happens.

Example, Zasalamel used Soul calibur and Soul edge to remove his curse, making the 2 swords dissappear. But 1 hour later, Kilik breaks Soul edge while Maxi holds on to it. Snake, what have you done, you've changed the future, you've created a time paradox.

Anyway, I'll search on that story later. Moogle 12 (talk) 12:57, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't have to be based on any ending in particular, really... Where was the Soul Edge ending that had Sophitia destroying the female Soul Edge, and Taki killing Cervantes before letting Siegfried take care of the rest? Exactly. 88.161.129.43 (talk) 23:18, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


Ok here now update. Since Maxi is in SC4, that means Soul Edge got destroyed. So, example Zasalamel still has the eternal life curse and so on like Taki really didnt kill Cervantes. But anyway, lets just wait until that game comes out. Moogle 12 (talk) 15:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Soul Edge is still around, and in better shape than ever, actually (I don't know how you came to the conclusion it got destroyed simply based on Maxi being in the new game), Zasalamel is still alive but he doesn't consider that a curse anymore, and Taki did kill Cervantes back in Soul Edge (even if he didn't stay dead for long). 88.161.129.43 (talk) 01:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


Ohh, that's me and my crazy mind! XD Moogle 12 (talk) 09:08, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, using 3rd party translator programs on the Japanese SCIV page, (and this is pretty sketchy) it seems Siegfried and Nightmare fought (while Taki watched from a distance), as they fought, the power of Soul Calibur and Soul Edge rose together until they reached breaking point, and did so. Soul Calibur then became bonded to Siegfried (hence the new armour), while Nightmare's power become to much for his faux body to handle, which began collapsing under the weight of it's corruption. Both fled. In the meantime, Cervantes tracked down Ivy and they fought. During the fight, Cervantes managed to (somehow) damage Ivy's soul, and left her for dead. However, Ivy managed to combine what was left of her own soul along with the remnant soul that dwelt within Ivy Blade (the life Nightmare had originally given it). The majority of other characters' seem to just state that they want to destroy Soul Edge (and a couple Soul Calibur along with it),and that "it will all end at Ostrheinsburg Castle".60.241.68.44 (talk) 09:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

The soul Ivy is currently using is actually an artficial soul she was working on. She was planning on creating a homunculus in order to wield Soul Calibur (as she can't do so herself, cursed blood and all), but with her own soul devoured by Cervantes, she had to change her plans and use the homunculus soul on herself instead.
The backstories are actually a fun read, what with their mentions of obscure characters such as Salia, Edgardo, Miser and Greed... 88.161.129.43 (talk) 18:26, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I get it now! Now what was that website you went to (the Japanese SCIV page), cause if it isn't in the External Links, then I'll place it. Moogle 12 (talk) 06:23, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

It was http://www.soularchive.jp/SC4/character/index.html to be specific, soularchive.jp had been in the external links for a long time but then for some reason someone took it down. 60.241.68.44 (talk) 06:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Redirect

Why the hell are Scheherazade and Angol Fear redirected to Soulcalibur IV? Tekken-EX (talk) 00:57, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, but they should be either their own articles or part of a list of SoulCalibur characters. A redirect seems unnecessary here. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 03:44, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
It's because wusses think "they're not important enough to have pages". It's a load of crap and now my picture of scheherazade is going to be deleted. Hobocrow (talk) 04:37, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
You can always make a profile for her and Angol Fear in the 'List of minor Soul series characters' section. Clamticore (talk) 08:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Then if that's the case then so should all the other bonus character articles. Tekken-EX (talk) 10:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Somebody go do that then cause I definitely don't know how. Make sure to find pictures for all the bonus characters too, cause I was just there and they're all gone. Wikipedia needs to stop deleting stuff they don't think is important, it's not like they run out of room. Hobocrow (talk) 20:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
What I just said was sarcastic. Tekken-EX (talk) 07:38, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia itself doesn't delete anything, it's the people using it doing that. There was a discussion about deleting Scheherazade's page since it didn't have enough substance in it. I tried to argue back that the page would get additional content in the coming months, but the reception was to make the page after there's something to write about. Some users really are quite uptight in holding up the quality standards. In my opinion that kind of attitude will only drive away newer users. SamSandy (talk) 10:12, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Soulcalibur IV boxart

thumb|left

I already uploaded it before I thought if it could have been fan made. A lot of sites are using it (even Amazon and GameStop) and some sites even say it's official. What do you guys think?

The Ivy-artwork in the PS3 boxart is from SC III, not IV. That alone gets me convinced that both of the boxarts are fake. Not to mention that they're both quite simplistic. I'd imagine Namco would put a little more effort to the boxes. SamSandy (talk) 10:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't know whether or not this is valid conformation for some of the boxarts out there, but on the SC4 website they show ivy, nightmare and Darth vader around soul edge like the boxart that gamestop has for the game.Shaq4evr (talk) 13:56, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Angol Fear or Fia Angol

Somebody changed Angol's name in the characters paragraph from Angol Fear to Fia Angol. I want to see their proof because everywhere else I go to says that the name is Angol Fear. The person has 5 days to show me their proof otherwise I shall be changing it back. Hobocrow (talk) 16:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

5 bucks says it's the phonetic name in Japanese. Go ahead and change it back, I say. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.215.10.1 (talk) 18:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Her phonetic name would be "Angoru Fia". "Fia Angol" is nonsense, really. And yes, the name is apparently supposed to be spelled "Angol Fear" in alphabet. 88.161.129.43 (talk) 18:26, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Well since everyone's in agreement and it's already changed back I guess this topic is dead. Hobocrow (talk) 00:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Where was it confirmed to be spelled as "Fear" though? In SGT Frog, there hasn't been a source I've seen that translates Angol Tia's name as Angol Tear, so I don't get why this is different. 128.6.30.198 (talk) 17:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
It was spelled as "Angol Fear" in FamiTsū. 88.161.129.43 (talk) 22:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
It's spelled "Angol Fear" evrywhere that has info on SCIV. So, this topic doesn't need any more comments. Thank you. Hobocrow (talk) 02:34, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Character section clean-up

I removed the text in the Characters section that depicted when each character was revealed, since it got too massive, too cluttery and too pointless. The references are still there, if someone's in doubt. SamSandy (talk) 13:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


Cloud and Ryu?

I seriously doubt they are in the game, unless someone can give me a refrence, I'm calling fake —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.189.164.0 (talk) 18:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, i think they're fake too, just like how some think that the guy from god of war is in the game too. Until there is valid conformation from Namco or famitsu(where most of the characters are revealed) then we shouldn't add them.Shaq4evr (talk) 19:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Algol

Don't delete him! He is legit. I've even seen him in a trailer. 24.23.227.168 (talk) 13:59, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Were may I ask? Samurai Cerberus (talk) 14:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I´ve seen him, too. here the new character can be seen, seems to be a boss: http://www.gamersyde.com/stream_7324_en.html Atomsturm (talk) 17:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

He does not belong in this article as a listed character until he gets a name and is specified as an actual character not a permutation. Furthermore, the character introduction says that there have been 31 confirmed characters but lists 32 (the 32nd being this unknown character). I would suggest mentioning him in the text as a mysterious character that little is known about. This is listed as a character "Unknown male character shown in Ubidays trailer." This is incorrect Ubidays is only for Ubisoft games. Soul Calibur is developed by Namco Bandai. This needs to be fixed.24.209.242.49 (talk) 01:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Everywhere I've seen the trailer hosted, including reputable sites like Gametrailers and Gamersyde, it has been listed as the "Ubidays 2008 Trailer" or "Ubidays 2008: Trancendance Trailer." So evidently the new screens and trailers were released at Ubidays. http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3168008 has the info as to why it was shown there, "...and Namco's Soul Calibur IV (which Ubisoft is publishing in Europe)." 20:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Would someone with more experience mind making a decision on whether or not to keep the unknown guy on there for now? The article that references his current name (Mars or Soul Edge Reborn) seems to be little more than rumor milling. 161.38.231.5 (talk) 19:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

No don't put the unknown character there for now until we have a name and a picture. Once we have that the person who keeps adding will have the right to add him/her again.--Lbrun12415 19:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

If it's the trailer I saw, it's the Apprentice, from Star Wars: Force Unleashed. (logged in, fixed sig)Tenraixtreme (talk) 00:02, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

It's not the trailer from reference 14, but Gamespot just revealed that The Apprentice is, indeed, in the game, He wields his red lightsaber backwards mostly as he fights. If I can find the trailer itself, I'll link it. Tenraixtreme (talk) 00:02, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Got it: http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/soulcaliburiv/news.html?sid=6192140 Tenraixtreme (talk) 00:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

It's not the apprentice we're talking about Tenraixtreme. We're talking about the guy in this trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gV_CULpF6AY Hobocrow (talk) 04:45, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
The name of the new character is cited, but I don't think the image source is that reliable (it came from Imageshack get it?). Some sort of a card or mini-magazine with someone holding it... Ok, it's official, but we need a better image--Logicartery (talk) 14:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

The new character's name is Algol, and he is evidently a villain and potential rival to Nightmare. By the way, shouldn't we give him his own article the way the other Soul Calibur 4 newbies have? 142.26.133.248 (talk) 19:46, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

The shot may be legit. Seems like it was part of the pre-order bonus that Best Buy gave out. Evidently it was a calendar with a bunch of characters, Algol being one of them. I wouldn't mind a higher res picture of it though. 71.199.116.161 (talk) 20:12, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh well, as long as we have his name, guess it's alright.--Logicartery (talk) 04:08, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Just so you know, Algol was confirmed to be the legendary king who created Soul Calibur (see Zasalamel's background story on the official site). 88.161.129.43 (talk) 11:18, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Any links to it may I suggest?--122.53.172.250 (talk) 11:49, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
'Fraid not, as it's Flash... But like I said, that's in Zasalamel's story. 88.161.129.43 (talk) 12:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I checked the SC 4 English website, and Zasalamel's backstory's not up yet. If you ment the Japanese website, then that's a problem 'cause not everyone (me included) can read Japanese. 142.26.133.248 (talk) 15:01, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I realize that, and that's actually one of the main reasons I pointed that one detail out. 88.161.129.43 (talk) 18:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
It's been translated for me several times and there is no mention of Algol, being the king. Hobocrow (talk) 14:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Yes, there is. 'Don't know what else to tell you. It's at the end of Zasalamel's story. 88.161.129.43 (talk) 17:47, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
There is mention of the king, but there's no mention of Algol at all. Therefore, it's not confirmed he's the king. He could be at a later date, though. Hobocrow (talk) 22:44, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
There is mention of the king, and they go on to explain how he's (for some reason) some all-powerful and dangerous guy that shouldn't be awakened, something that was already hinted at in the (overall) story section of the official site. And we have a Japanese article with a picture of Algol (no name, but it's clearly him) and the caption "mezamete wa naranu mono no fukkatsu...!" (something along the lines of "the return of the one that shouldn't be awakened...!"). Do you really need more? 88.161.129.43 (talk) 23:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes, you really need more, because what you've described is Original Research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. A reliable source needs to make that conclusion for us for it to be usable. DurinsBane87 (talk) 12:57, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
I realize that. Why do you think I mentioned that here instead of editing the article? 88.161.129.43 (talk) 13:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
You need to reread what I said about the official site. I said there was mention of the king. There wasn't mention of Algol's name anywhere though. 98.210.24.218 (talk) 01:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, you apparently need to read what I explained just above (23:14, 1 July 2008). 88.161.129.43 (talk) 02:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Algol's name and artwork and screens of him have finally been revealed "exclusively" by Jeuxvideo.fr. So there should be no question that this character is a legit, playable one. Link: http://www.jeuxvideo.fr/soulcalibur-iv-algol-exclusivite-actu-151060.html SamSandy (talk) 08:17, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
And because of that we do know, Algol is a king, but still not confirmed as the one who created the swords. 98.210.24.218 (talk) 20:45, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Starkiller

Could this Starkiller be a Bonus character for a light-saber style? Smurai Cerberus 12:13, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

It's very possible, but until Namco confirms/denies anything, all you can do is speculate. With as in-depth as they are going with the Bonus Characters this time around (as opposed to the laughable bonus characters from SC3), it wouldn't be too far fetched. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.215.10.1 (talk) 23:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I liked the Shop girls. Smurai Cerberus 02:02, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

If his name has been officially revealed to be Starkiller, then why does this page still call him "The Apprentice"? It used to call him Starkiller, but now it doesn't. Why? 142.26.133.248 (talk) 15:02, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

FamiTsū called him "The Apprentice" (in English) in their article, so there's a good chance the game will call him that rather than "Starkiller" (apparently a codename anyway, I believe). 88.161.129.43 (talk) 18:19, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I believe the article should be changed just to call him the Apprentice, as that's still his official name, and Starkiller is potiental spoilers for the Force Unleashed.92.21.73.176 (talk) 23:34, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Sourced. Should stay as Starkiller.71.193.28.46 (talk) 04:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Should stay as "The Apprentice", based on the FamiTsū article. The fact the character will also be referred to as "Starkiller" in the Star Wars game is irrelevant. We're not listing Darth Vader as "Anakin Skywalker", even if it's his real name, are we? Besides, it looks like "Starkiller" isn't even the guy's actual name, but a codename used by Vader... 88.161.129.43 (talk) 09:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
"The Secret Apprentice" should be the preferred name due to the members of LucasArts mentioning of the name (in official game website). I added another source to somewhat confirm the "Starkiller" name. GameTrailers TV revealed that the first letter of the CODE name of The Secret Apprentice is S but we can't call him S but we can't have him as just "The Secret Apprentice" because it doesn't seem to specify who this person is (if the reader doesn't read the background info on the SCIV characters section). We can have it as a place holder until the release of SCIV or The Force Unleashed game/book/comic. The Phantomnaut (talk) 23:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Well, for this article, the preferred name should be the one appearing below (next to? I don't remember) the health gauge, or on the character select screen... I guess we'll know soon enough. 88.161.129.43 (talk) 23:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Character customisations

Has it been confirmed whether customisations are only for new created characters or whether each character can be customised as with the other fighting games VF and Tekken? I would hope that the game follows the same path as the rest and introduces specific customisations for each of the normal characers. I'm sure I read on here before that characters can be customised but it has since been removed - making me wonder if it has been confirmed that you can only customise the garbage create-a-souls 86.141.141.178 (talk) 19:16, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

As far as I know, you will be only able to change the color. And in my opinion customizing the normal characters isn´t needed, as you can make your own characters. And in Tekken 5 it´s only purpose was making the fighters look like clowns. Atomsturm (talk) 11:15, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

  • I disagree. Customizing the normal characters is far better than creating shitty new ones - but that's besides the point - where has it been confirmed that SC3's color changing is back? 86.162.212.229 (talk) 15:08, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
The newest article on 1UP.com reveals that you will be able to completely customize Normal characters, Tekken 5 style. Parts will be able to be added and removed, along with color swapping. Considering Soul Calibur has never had the eccentric humor that Tekken has, I doubt we'll see such outlandish additions for the Soul characters as we have seen in the Tekken series. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.215.10.1 (talk) 15:43, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Star Killer...another new character

I was just watching the new trailer for SCIV and Darth Vader's new apprentice featured in Star Wars: The Force Unleashed will play a huge part in the new SCIV.Gears Of War 00:23, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah there was discussion earlier, it's sourced so it should be settled with Starkiller.The Phantomnaut (talk) 04:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Kratos

Who keeps adding the guy from God of war? Smurai Cerberus 13:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

"Kratos." I believe 1up posted a rumor about that. Of course, we'd need more than that... 88.161.129.43 (talk) 14:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Definitely should not be added to the site, EGM/1UP are very well known for spreading rumours that are completely untrue, and I'd seriously doubt they'd announce such a high profile character so close to the release of the game, it's something you'd think they'd be hyping up more.92.21.73.176 (talk) 23:33, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Edit Warring

Plese stop edit warring about the name of the Secret Apprentice.Gears Of War 23:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

So it's down to Shura and Ashlotte?

I guess no more guest artist character addition? I hope at least one more lol. (Aside from that Starkiller from Star Wars)--JCD (Talk) 10:56, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

We simply don't know yet. There's still a month to go before we know the roster with 100% certainty, and even after that there could be downloadable characters. SamSandy (talk) 17:29, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Guess, that'd be enough. But I still hope for an original to the series.--JCD (Talk) 03:39, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Going by the character select screen, there are still two characters we don't know about. All the anime designs are under one box, so they don't even count. But hopefully it means there will be two other, proper SC characters. I think we have enough bonus guys at this point, but I'm sure there'll be more for download, which is fair enough.92.2.84.44 (talk) 23:17, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
And what do you know, just today a new bonus character, Kamikirimusi, is revealed to join the roster. That's a total of five anime chicks for you, and more could be coming up.SamSandy (talk) 19:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
OMG!!!! This absolutely made my day!!! Thanks SamSandy :D. --JCD (Talk) 10:44, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

question

on the References the character Revenant is there why is he not on the list.--Lbrun12415 00:53, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Because some jerk removed him, even though there were references... Putting him back. SamSandy (talk) 07:25, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Revenant was not confirmed to be a Bonus Character, and could simply be a CPU-only character, like Keres or Dragon were in the previous game. Erigu (talk) 11:36, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
But Revenant is confirmed to be in the game, so he should appear on that list. And since he was a bonus character before, it's more likely that he'll return to be one in this game as well (unlike Keres or the others). It's easy to change his position on that list once we get better confirmation, but he's important enough to get mentioned in the list for now - he even has an article of his own. SamSandy (talk) 11:48, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
"More likely" doesn't mean "confirmed". We shouldn't post predictions. Erigu (talk) 11:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Don't take it out of the context. Revenant IS confirmed to be in the game, it just hasn't been revealed in which position. BONUS is more likely than a random unplayable character, based on his previous status. IF I'm wrong, it can easily be changed. In any case, Revenant should be listed for now. Don't start an edit war with me, please. SamSandy (talk) 12:06, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
I have better things to do than to start an edit war... But you should realize that "more likely" is irrelevant, here. We're not supposed to post personal predictions and then change things if they turn out to be wrong. We're supposed to post confirmed information. Same thing for the number of "confirmed characters." Would you argue that that number should include any and all CPU-only character that could be in the game? We also have a "Frederick" that's "likely" to be Siegfried's father, if you go there... Erigu (talk) 12:28, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
But if instead of Revenant we would've seen a screenshot of, say, Hwang or Li Long, would you have doubted their playability then? But I'll leave it to this for now. It's not long before we get total confirmation, and I'm eager to say the legendary words "told you so". SamSandy (talk) 13:17, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm eager to say the legendary words "told you so".
Sorry. ^^; Erigu (talk) 15:25, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Had it been a screenshot of Li Long or Hwang, I would probably have thought them more likely to be playable than Revenant here... but I wouldn't have edited the article either. Again, my position isn't that I think Revenant won't be playable. He might be, how would I know? My position is that we should wait for an actual confirmation before including him in that list along with the other characters. Erigu (talk) 13:29, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
It is so easy to tell that this picture is from an actual version of soulcalibur 4, perhaps a french version, but this clearly shows that he is indeed in the game and is most likely a bonus character. He might not be playable, but do we know yet if algol is playable? Lets just say that he's in the game and should be listed.Shaq4evr (talk) 16:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Again with the "most likely"... As for Algol, he has his own official illustration, he is visible on the character selection screen... That's another matter, really. Erigu (talk) 16:42, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
'Just thought of something... Remember this?
Both the Bonus Characters and the Guest Characters are in there, so it should be the complete list of "real" characters, right? 33 slots, plus 1 for Yoda, since the screenshot is from the PlayStation 3 version. So that's 34 characters total. The 3 empty slots would be for The Apprentice (bottom left), Shura and Kamikirimusi (the two missing Bonus Characters).
Now, I'm not saying that Revenant, Frederick, Knight, Shadow, etc (?) won't be playable... Maybe they will be, I have no idea. But it definitely looks like "they don't belong" with the 34 characters we had listed on the article before people started adding Revenant to the lot. Erigu (talk) 17:15, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Not to be rude or anything but i don't think any body know how big the roster will be. Maybe it would be Like Dragon ball Z B 3 with that big list anything can happen.--Lbrun12415 17:19, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Besides, not all bonus characters fit the Chain of Souls (the screenshot). There's still one standard character to be revealed according to the character select screen, next to Vader and the Apprentice: http://image.jeuxvideo.com/images/p3/s/o/soc4p3425.jpg In any case, I think you don't have the support of the community on your side, Erigu. SamSandy (talk) 18:22, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Besides, not all bonus characters with the Chain of Souls (the screenshot).
Er... I'm not sure as to what that sentence is supposed to mean... Like I said, all the confirmed Bonus Characters and (PlayStation 3) Guest Characters are there, save for The Apprentice, Shura and Kamikirimusi, and, conveniently enough, there are three empty slots left. So the count is right.
As for the character select screen, yeah, I realize there's still a slot unaccounted for... But then again, maybe it's for Yoda? After all, we have another version of the "Chain of Souls" screen here, with slots for both Vader and Yoda, strangely enough. 'Could also for a Mokujin-like character (even if I wonder why he wouldn't have a spot on the "Chain of Souls" screen). Heck, 'could also not be a character slot at all, for all we know (random creation, perhaps?).
Besides, if Revenant was playable as a Bonus Character, wouldn't he share the top right slot with Scheherazade anyway? And why wouldn't he be on the "Chain of Souls" scren? Same thing for Frederick...
Again, I still think you're really jumping the gun by listing Revenant along with the other actually confirmed characters... But hey... Go ahead... I'm just saying... ^^; Erigu (talk) 18:47, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Edited a typo in that sentence you were wondering. SamSandy (talk) 19:06, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. But like I said, all the confirmed Bonus Characters fit in that screen, actually. Erigu (talk) 19:13, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Not counting the one unrevealed character, yes. But you're speculating just as much as I am. It comes down to who's speculations are more likely, really. But we'll find out the whole truth soon enough. SamSandy (talk) 19:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Again, you're assuming there's still one unrevealed character. That last empty slot on the character select could mean something else, like I said above.
And yes, I'm speculating. The game isn't out yet, so that can't be helped. Thing is, I'm not putting speculation (likely or not) in the article, and you are. Erigu (talk) 19:26, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Wouldn't a viable solution be add these characters to the main page, but in their own section? We know and have viable proof that these characters are indeed -in- the game, we just don't know their status. Maybe create a "Confirmed to Appear" area or something along those lines? That way these confirmed characters are not left out of the page simply because they aren't playable per-se. As for that extra slot, there is a good chance that is being reserved for Yoda/Vader (DLC for Premium Edition purchasers, speculate -that-). Namco has just debuted their final boss, it would be HIGHLY unlikely to see another character announced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.215.10.1 (talk) 22:36, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
I wouldn't have a problem with that. Erigu (talk) 02:41, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Neither would I. I do disagree with you on the note about there can be no new characters after the final boss. Maybe they won't reveal that one character at all until the game is released, who knows. SamSandy (talk) 08:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
If there is another character, I believe it would be along the lines of Abyss or Inferno. Either a powered up version of Nightmare or Algol, or Inferno/Soul Edge coming back to play the Mimic character again. I didn't mean to come off as sounding as if there are absolutely no new characters, it's just not in Namco's style to hide playable characters once they've revealed that final player. I'd like to see a brand new character more than anything, but there is just a crazy high chance that if we see anyone new, it will be a rehash of a pre-existing boss. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.215.10.1 (talk) 14:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay, since there is further contention on this, please, explain all arguements as to WHY or WHY NOT Revenant, Frederick, and all other characters proven to appear in SCIV should be added to the main page. 65.215.10.1 (talk) 21:27, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

All the other character are fine I just don't think adding a new section for two unknow rolls of characters is nessesary.
Support your opinion, yes or no doesn't exactly cut it.65.215.10.1 (talk) 21:30, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Since we know 100% that the other characters are playable they can stay unlike the other two whom how unconfirmed rolls they shouldn't be added unless we know 100% sure that they playable.--Lbrun12415 21:32, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
But Revenant has been playable before, thus justifying his appearance in the list. And Frederick Schtauffen has been a very important NPC who's just now made his first appearance in battle. Even though we don't know if they're playable or not yet, the readers should get to know they're both appearing in the game nevertheless. We can easily edit the heading once we know more. Those are my reasons. SamSandy (talk) 21:43, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
What you just did was orinial reserch. And it doesn'tmatteryou have to show proof that they are playable.--Lbrun12415 21
45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Nobody's saying they are playable yet. They are of unknown status, confirmed to appear. The title is not "Playable Characters", just "Characters". SamSandy (talk) 21:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
They wouldn't be on list if they arent playable aslo if you read on top it says 34-35 are playable.--Lbrun12415 21
52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
That's right, there are 34 confirmed playable characters, but that doesn't prevent listing other characters as well. You have a very absurd reason for not wanting the section, I must say. There are clear proof that both of these characters appear in the game, and liable resources to go with it. You, on the other hand, have nothing but your opinions. SamSandy (talk) 22:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
There you go again putting words in my moth. Never said they are not in the game I said saying unknown rolls is speculation they could be boss's or something else. But since you helped me answer my question i'll let you put it back but I still think that the section should be named something else.--Lbrun12415 22:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
How noble of you. But if you wanted to have the section under another name, why didn't you say so earlier? Do you have actual suggestions, because I'm open to everything. The "of unknown status" only means that we don't know if they are bonus, unplayable or what yet. SamSandy (talk) 22:15, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Maybe we can say Characters with unknown rolls or what you said but with character in front.--Lbrun12415 22:17, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
That was the title all along! "Characters of unknown status". You do know that status means roughly the same as role, right? SamSandy (talk) 22:21, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes I do also my computer is kinda messed up so every time i scoll down the words get messed up. Maybe I missed read your thing.--Lbrun12415 22:23, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Revenant

On many different pages of wiki they say that Revenant is in this game. Such as here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenant_(Soul_Calibur) and here http://soulcalibur.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page. why can't we add him to the list. Also some one is adding characters who are no returning with out sources please watch out for this.--Lbrun12415 04:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Er... It's not like you can use Wikipedia itself as a source. ^^; Erigu (talk) 12:09, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to try to work on a table I'll post it on my talk page if you like it let me know.--Lbrun12415 22:20, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

no new section

I don't think there should be a new section for the unknown rolls of characters. Unless you can prove that they are playable then we can add them to the playable list. By adding a new section makes the list bigger and confusing. Please dont add a new section unless we have 100% that they are playable or even bosses. Also I was thinking of adding a table to make thing less confusing, but I want toget you ideas first.--Lbrun12415 21:40, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

There was a table before, but it got deleted for making things even more confusing than now. And the only one who's making a problem out of this thing is you. SamSandy (talk) 21:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
No i'm not every one is different just b/c you like something doesn't mean I have to.--Lbrun12415 21:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
You don't have to like it, but you also can't go deleting things without a proper discussion first. DISCUSS FIRST, DELETE AFTER YOU'VE GOTTEN OKAY FROM OTHERS. SamSandy (talk) 21:47, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
I think the list should stay as it was before Character, Bonus, Guest.--Lbrun12415 21:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes, we know that already. But it's only your opinion. Why do you deliberately ignore other people's opinions? What you're doing now is edit warring and borderline vandalism. But I'm not going against you alone, we'll see what other people think about this. SamSandy (talk) 21:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
WHo the hell are you toput words in my moth by saying I ignore other people ideas if you check my history I changed a lot of shit to make other users happy by all means it seems your not respecting my ideas by leaving the list it was but if i were to say that I'm putting words in your moth. and for the Vandalism you added a picture that was so small people need to zoom in to see. you didnt ask on the talk page if you can add it. Looks like you the only vandal here.they can be added if not hit the road. And by the way unless other have proof that the two characters are playable --Lbrun12415 22:02, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
I did not add that picture. And you are just getting personal now. Read the discussion above: it has me, Erigu and several anonymous editors agreeing that such a section could be created. Those are the opinions you just ignored, I wasn't talking about your history on the site or anything. Check this page if you will: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution. "If -- you disagree completely with a point of view expressed in an article, think twice before simply deleting it." Just calm down now and wait for other people to join the discussion. SamSandy (talk) 22:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Once again I reiterate my previous opinion: The article should be reverted to SamSandy's update with Unknown Playable Status or however everyone wants it worded. General consensus was that it should be added, it should stay that way unless we get solid agreement against this. One person disputing does not count as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.215.10.1 (talk) 22:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Not to be rude or anything but me and Sammy already fix our different views.--Lbrun12415 22:59, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
This is getting -really- old. Why was the section removed AGAIN without discussing it on talk?65.215.10.1 (talk) 00:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Fixed the article. Will move to get this protected or semi-protected if this continues.65.215.10.1 (talk) 01:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
You know, considering we've now seen the likes of Johan Dürer, Azola, Frederick, etc, I'm really thinking this new batch of characters is about as noteworthy as Charade, the Keres, Dragon, the Will-o'-the-Wisp were in Soulcalibur III. I.e. "not very." Mentioning their appearance in their respective articles? Why not. On the main article though? 88.161.129.43 (talk) 13:24, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
My stance to this has been from the start to only include really noteworthy characters into the list of characters with unknown status. And so far, that's only Revenant and Frederick Schtauffen, who both are canon and are a part of the main story. If it turns out neither of them is playable, they can be removed from the list, if you ask me. SamSandy (talk) 15:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Dürer is canon as well, and is about as "relevant" as Revenant... Also, Charade is canon, was playable in Soulcalibur II, and is only mentioned in passing in the main Soulcalibur III article ("all the characters are back, except for A, B and C, and Charade is in the game, kinda-sorta"). Not part of any list anyway. 88.161.129.43 (talk) 16:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
But Dürer hasn't been playable before. And can we really say if the "Dürer" character is the same as Johan Dürer? This is just speculation, though. If you want to add Dürer, I won't go deleting him. As for Charade, there's no sign of him appearing in this game yet. And were talking about this article here, not SC III's. SamSandy (talk) 18:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
For Dürer possibly not being Johan Dürer... you're kidding, right? ^^;
And no, I'm not saying I'd like to include him in the article, on the contrary. I mentioned Charade because Charade was a playable character in Soulcalibur II (like Revenant was in Soulcalibur III), simply "appeared" in Soulcalibur III (like Revenant might well do in Soulcalibur IV, based on what've seen so far), and only got a mention in passing in the Soulcalibur III article (which is all Revenant should be getting in the Soulcalibur IV article, in my opinion). I was simply making a point. Or trying to, anyway... 88.161.129.43 (talk) 21:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, as I see it, all Revenant does get is a mention, anyway. He's mentioned once in the list. Would it be so different if he was mentioned only in the text portion? I don't get you. ;P And yes, I was kidding. SamSandy (talk) 08:57, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Would it be so different if he was mentioned only in the text portion?
In my opinion? Yeah. When I see a list like that, I figure it's exhaustive/complete. Here, it's pretty arbitrary (Revenant or Frederick are relevant, but Dürer isn't? according to which criterias?). On the other hand, a mere mention in passing doesn't imply exhaustivity.
Not that I'd petition for these characters to be mentioned at all in the article anyway, myself... It looks like we might be dealing with quite a few of them in the final game (if they went as far as to include Azola...), so I'd rather wait for the release and then try and sort things out, really... 88.161.129.43 (talk) 15:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
It's only a matter of two weeks before we can sort them out properly. Before that, I don't think it requires anything from you to just let the list be as it is. And the list versus text is purely semantics, really. SamSandy (talk) 18:05, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Question part 2

were it says guest on the page should it be Guest/Exclusive?--Lbrun12415 23:17, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Probably not, as it seems a tad redundant. The three of them are Guest characters from the Star Wars universe, and their console exclusivity is already noted within the section.65.215.10.1 (talk) 23:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Found something

http://image.jeuxvideo.com/images/p3/s/o/soc4p3267.jpg and here for Revanant http://image.jeuxvideo.com/images/p3/s/o/soc4p3311.jpg

The question now is can we add them to the list?--Lbrun12415 13:56, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Those are the exact same screens used as sources to confirm Frederick and Revenant's appearance in battle, already. SamSandy (talk) 15:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Then why can't we add the both of them to the list instead of "unknown".--Lbrun12415 14:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Because we don't know about their exact status. 88.161.129.43 (talk) 15:44, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
You still don't get it? It is not "unknown" if they are in the game, it is "unknown" if they are bonus or non-playable. SamSandy (talk) 19:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
... You weren't replying to me, right? ^^; 88.161.129.43 (talk) 19:36, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, no. One colon too many. SamSandy (talk) 21:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Since the head of Revenant in that image is a skeleton, I highly believe he's not just a custom character (since that head is exclusive for Revenant in SCIII). However, what's with Dark Vador? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Logicartery (talk • contribs) 10:17, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
What do you I sill don't get it? The game comes out in 11 days and still no word. You guys and the makers of this game really don't care about the fans or anything. If i were the maker I would do a better job at this and announce the characters before the game comes out. If I have the time to day i'll look into it, but only after I see Batman.--Lbrun12415 14:29, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
If i were the maker I would do a better job at this and announce the characters before the game comes out.
Which is what they did, actually. There are 34 characters total, and they were announced. 'Looks like Revevant, Frederick, Dürer, Azola and co. aren't in that list (that includes both "Guest Characters" and "Bonus Characters"). 88.161.129.43 (talk) 15:03, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Algol = Hero King

If it wasn't obvious enough, here's an actual confirmation. 'Turns out the Hero King/Algol did sacrifice his life to create Soul Calibur, but the ritual failed and resulted in what was basically another Soul Edge. It's Zasalamel's clan that slowly turned the new sword into the Soul Calibur we know. As for Algol, his soul remained dormant within the Soul Calibur all that time. Erigu (talk) 17:20, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

YUMERIA anime secret stuffs

I heard there will be some unlockable stuff from other NAMCO titles like Yumeria(funny anime) and maybe more,

any sources I might have missed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Murakumo-Elite (talk • contribs) 20:03, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Not as far as I know. And with the game being so close to release, I kinda doubt that. I guess it could be downloadable content, but Namco just said there would be downloadable parts (for created characters) and BGMs, nothing about Yumeria... 88.161.129.43 (talk) 20:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Deleting sources

Somebody deleted the sources from the characters section, claiming that Famitsu confirmed that there are only 34 playable characters. Now, otherwise I'd agree with the deletion, but since the source is in Japanese, we can't know if it really says what the editor said. It's recommendable to discuss things here before making big deletions like that, anyway, if not for anything else than to explain your reasons. SamSandy (talk) 09:54, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Er... But my reasons were pretty clear: FamiTsū said there were 34 characters total. Surely, Japanese sources aren't considered void, right?
As for the sources... Were they really necessary anymore, considering all these characters can be seen on the official site anyway? 88.161.129.43 (talk) 13:54, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
But does Famitsu say "there are only 34 playable characters", or does it say "there are 34 playable characters revealed this far". I surely can't say, because I can't read Japanese. But let's say you're right. I think the article still needs a mention about Revenant and Frederick Schtauffen being in the game, even though they don't seem to be playable. The official site doesn't list all the characters, though, since they're missing both the guests and the bonus characters from the character page. SamSandy (talk) 18:07, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Like I said, it says that there are 34 characters total. And you're right, the official site doesn't mention the Bonus and Guest Characters. The references for the Guest Characters are still there, but I guess we should put the ones for the Bonus Characters back. 88.161.129.43 (talk) 18:32, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
The strategy guide hits shelves on Monday, so we should have quite a bit of clarity as to what's going on in the character section very, very soon.65.215.10.1 (talk) 22:25, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Character Sections

As mush as I disagree with character sections in general (see the pages for the Super Smash Bros. games for the alternative, if you wish), I REALLY feel that we shouldn't be saying which characters require unlocking. When you get into that you start veering into game guide territory. I want to hear some comments before I go ahead and remove them, however. DurinsBane87 (talk) 14:57, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm for removing the (has to be unlocked) comments on the character section. Just letting people know they are in the game should be more than enough.65.215.10.1 (talk) 15:16, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Same here. 88.161.129.43 (talk) 16:38, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Does it matter? Think about it in the bit above this (referring to the strategy guide) it says it will be out soon (the guide not the game) so people will know that any way. And after all people put the plots of games and films on wikipedia so why not a small amount of game guide?--Inputdata (talk) 15:27, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
The Soul Calibur entries are under fire for being far too game guide-esque already (see Soul series talk page), the last thing you want to do is fill up one of the main pages with more useless, game guide info. Keep it as it is. 65.215.10.1 (talk) 17:08, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Screen Shots

It would be lovely to see some screenshots for SCIV. Can anyone get some without getting in trouble for the licensing?

71.142.243.76 (talk) 07:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see why you wouldn't be able to. There are plenty of gaming sites that have had screen shots up for quite some time now. Don't see why anyone would get into any trouble. --Jigsaw 541 (talk) 12:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)Jigsaw 541

I know anyone could put up some screens, the only problem is, screenshot of what?? Crit finishes? or something imo.--JCD (Talk) 14:45, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
This is just a suggestion, but how about Darth Vader and Yoda fighting? They seem to be interesting.GENERALZERO (talk) 15:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
While that would be viable in showing that they will be available as DLC in the near future, a screen shot with those two would not illustrate Soul Calibur IV; in fact, it would cause the unaware reader to think it was a screenshot from a Star Wars fighter. If any screen shots were to be added, the best bet would be to get some combat screens between series staples (ie: Voldo vs Sieg, Cervantes vs Taki, ect.) 65.215.10.1 (talk) 17:25, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Guest characters?

What is meant by guest characters? I don't know what the difference is meant to be? --Inputdata (talk) 15:16, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Well... They come from other works of fiction? 88.161.129.43 (talk) 21:39, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

And Vader, Yoda, and The Apprentice (Starkiller) should have redirects to their actual pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChuckCoke (talk • contribs) 21:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Story

Is there a story in SC4 because I don't see a story section here or on the character articles?--Sanji_1990 (talk) 19:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Technically there is but it's essentially the same as the last three games, 'a tale of swords and souls' and all that rot. It's basically all the fighters trying to get Soul Edge and Soul Calibur again I'm guessing. You'd think they'd all have about 100 copies by now... ;) Leemorrison (talk) 02:33, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
lol i guess you're right but what i mean is is there a continuation of the story, so we know what was or wasn't canon from sc3--Sanji_1990 (talk) 14:38, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
None of the endings in SC3 are canon. Abyss never existed. Siegfried and Nightmare just got tougher and everyone went on their merry way. Oh and Ivy died and came back, but her homoculous is totally bottom tier. 65.215.10.1 (talk) 15:06, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
cool thank you--Sanji_1990 (talk) 16:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Edits to critical finish

The critical finish can be performed when the soul gage is emptied, not after emptying it again as stated in the article. could someone correct this? --78.105.181.53 (talk) 17:54, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

The whole article needs an overhaul. Nothing is explained correctly. If Namco learned anything from their SCIV marketing, it's that they need to hire a much better translator. 65.215.10.1 (talk) 23:12, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Not sure why you'd blame Namco, here... 88.161.129.43 (talk) 01:23, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
edited the Critical finish part having played the game myself and seeing how it actaully works first-hand. Fell free to make changes to it.Zmbymstr11223 (talk) 06:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


Sources

Can we get some confirmation that Sasaki denied getting Vader for the 360/Yoda for the PS3? I miss seeing those lovely blue numbers after big claims like that. Don't feel like removing it until said sources are thrown up, though. Do what you will. DancingZombies (talk) 06:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Online Wait Times

I'm not sure how to say this without sounding like original research, but I'd have to disagree with the statement that it takes "ten minutes" to find a match (the statement about Quick Match-Ups often sending you to full games is true for me, however). The host ability and the Filtered Match Search makes joining another game take far less than even a minute. I'm taking out the two sourceless statements. DancingZombies (talk) 07:23, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't really have any sources, etc either, so I am in the same boat. On the PS3 version I played over 60 matches in several hours during one day. And 40 the next to get the 100 games online honor. It definitely did not take ten minutes to start a match. I will however agree that some times it took multiple attempts to get into a game with error messages as described about game being full, etc. But there were also several times that as soon as I was out of a game, I hit quick match and was right back into another with out error. Again this is original research mostly, but I'm not sure where you can find official statement about the online play. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.126.224.218 (talk) 03:31, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Algol

Should Algol have his own section? He is, after all, a character, with his own story, even. He's quite unlike Abyss from Soul Calibur III that way--Abyss never had a playable story. And yet Abyss (Soulcalibur) has his own section on the Zasalamel page. Algol doesn't have anything. 24.15.53.225 (talk) 07:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

  • And now that I've actually looked at some other Soul Calibur character pages, I see that Algol appears on many of them. His plotline seems to be spread out amongst various pages. 24.15.53.225 (talk) 07:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars: Visions of the Blade

I wanted to go and put this, but I wanted to see opinion if it should be put on here: http://www.starwars.com/games/videogames/swsc4comic.html The online comic gives a backstory on how the 3 SW characters ended up in the SC Universe. 202.69.180.104 (talk) 14:58, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Why is there no storyline section?

All of the other soul calibur articles discuss the storyline.--Smashbrosboy (talk) 23:55, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Because there is little to no story to be found in the game. I mean, seriously. The only thing that will give you a hint about what's going on are the character's endings, which aren't enough to fill a story section with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.194.98.244 (talk) 14:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

As much as I hate to admit it, he's right. Still, even if there's not enough to warrant a whole section, perhaps something can be mentioned in the intro; along the veins of "continuing the plot from the previous title..." or some such.--199.79.10.117 (talk) 17:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
The Japanese official site has long profiles/bios for the characters, actually. Basically, the texts you get at the beginning of the different characters are CliffsNotes of those. Erigu (talk) 10:46, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

No Team Battle Mode

I included some information in realtion to the exclusion of a team versus mode in Soul Calibur 4, which someone has since deleted for some reason. I will keep re-including it until someone gives me a valid reason as to why it should not be included. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.220.13.6 (talk) 22:24, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Fans were also disappointed at the lack of a Team Versus Mode, which allows two players to fight with up to eight characters each. The Mode had been included in all previous instalments of Soul Calibur yet it conspicuously absent in Soul Calibur 4.

— SCIV article

Semi-Protection

I'm tired of undoing all the edits by unregistered users. Most of them keep changing little details. The page is now semi-protected for 2 weeks. Let's see how that goes... Thanks to AndonicO for allowing the protection. --James599 (talk) 14:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Roster

Should we get a picture of the full roster since the game is now released? To replace that big list.--Lbrun12415 11:25, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

  • No, that would be unnecessary. It'll only take up extra space.

Besides, all the other fighting game pages use a big list too. --James599 (talk) 13:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

New downloadable content

I am not sure if anyone can find a better source, but that section should be updated per this. I checked the Playstation Store, and it is indeed correct. --24.154.173.243 (talk) 23:10, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


Bonus Characters

Yeah I forgot my password... and user... anyway Shouldn't there be an article on the bonus characters, I know for certain Angol is from Sgt. Frog but that's the only one I recognize, in any case they still seem important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.166.158.74 (talk) 07:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Angol Fear is Angol Mois's cousin, actually, so she's not really from that manga. Erigu (talk) 18:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Soulcalibur_IV/Archive_1&oldid=1140147926"