From the Kingdom Hearts Wiki, the Kingdom Hearts encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AlVan - I'm the leading man, you know.
TALK - {{{time}}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This page and this page are built very differently for some reason. Re:CoM's is more like the Final Mixes where it has a list of differences from the original game, whereas Re: Coded's is built like a normal game page. So should we keep it like it is, change Re:Coded's to Re:CoM's style, vice-versa, or a combination of both? When I say combination of both I mean make it like a normal game article along with the list of differences or perhaps making a page by itself for the list of differences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pea14733 Freeze! — 10:40, 14 July 2011 (EDT)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 I think we shouldn't change them. Because Re:coded is entirely different from coded(if not count the plot), making it feels like it is a different game. Re:CoM, on the other hand, still has the same battle system as CoM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
KrytenKoro - Click
TALK -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The re-released games should not have plot synopsis, unless it's a new scene, so that can go.
They should have an introduction, a section on announcement and development, and a section on major changes (gameplay and matrix system for Re:coded, for example). Next, a comprehensive list of all changes, organized by type, and finally, a screenshot gallery and a packaging gallery. Each re-released game is going to need this.
That's a general overview, and specific sections can be hashed out on those articles' talk pages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AlVan - I'm the leading man, you know.
TALK - {{{time}}}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Another thing, on boss pages for Re:CoM most of them are only for CoM. Shouldn't we have different strategies for bosses that require more/less skills or different gameplay aspects for those pages? For Re:Coded, shouldn't we clarify the difference between what happened to a world or character in their respective articles? For example, when I played Re:Coded, I rushed and ended up never having Cloud in the party. I replayed Olympus and I found out that I had to search for him. In his article, it says that he automatically joins the party under the coded section. I'm not saying we should make an entire headline for these games, but mabe a couple of sentences to distinguish differences between the originals and the remakes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.png){kind=small}
