Talk:JFK Reloaded/Archive 1

Archive 1

Non-neutral P.O.V.?

The part about Lee Harvey Oswald being kennedy's supposed assassin?

• He never went to trial, therefor, he never was convicted guilty in a court of law. He died an innocent man. He is the alleged assassin. - CaptainAmerica 04:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

He can be the alleged assassin in the articles that address the assassination, but this deals with a video game where he is supposed to be the assassin. I prefer the use of "supposed" over "alleged". cookiecaper (talk / contribs) 07:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

How it works

Wikipedia is not supposed to be a manual. There is way too much detail in there.--Drat (Talk) 03:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The FAQ from JFKReloaded.net

Hopefully this might answer some questions people have about the game. You can see the original site (www.jfkreloaded.net) at www.archive.org. Johnny "ThunderPeel2001" Walker 14:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio textdump removed. The text can be found at this Wayback Machine archive.-Drat (Talk) 17:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Conspiracy Theories and JFK Reloaded

The aim of Traffic games was to PROVE the Warren Commission's findings. This was repeatedly stated by Traffic and by Kirk Ewing in the few interviews he did. If you're convinced that this simulator DISproves the Commission's findings, you should be aware that it does NOT. The chances of repeating Oswald's fatal shot exactly are astronomically low, but that's not against the Commission's findings at all. Many conspiracy theorists refuse to believe that Oswald was even able to a) Make a shot from that distance, b) Able to even see the motorcade, c) That there was ZERO chance of the bullet taking anything anywhere near CLOSE to the official verdict. (See "High Treason" and "JFK"). This simulator's version of events states (if you believe its accuracy) that all of these three things were not only possible, but also highly likely. Just because no user was able to match the Commission's findings EXACTLY, does not mean the findings were false... In precisely the same way that no two users got EXACTLY the same results in the JFK Reloaded competition (there was only one winner, who scored 783 out of 1000), the chances of the bullet hitting precisely the same path is RANDOM. Just because you, dear reader, cannot repeat the exact same shot that the winning user, "Major Koenig", did, doesn't mean that he didn't do it! (Obviously.) So to repeat: This game categorically confirms the findings of the Warren Commission. It was designed to do so. If you don't believe it does, then you are saying that the simulation itself is flawed (which may well be the case -- I'm not in any position to say you're wrong), but not the simulation's findings. I hope that's clear to all the conspiracy theorists. Johnny "ThunderPeel2001" Walker (talk) 15:35, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Traffic Games Status; Comment on Game

The last I heard, they were planning on coming out with a driving simulator next. However, I don't think they released anything since this game came out. If you go to the JFK reloaded website, it just has a single frontpage which comments on 'history' being made on November 2004 (when they released the game) and also about the "legacy" of JFK.

I have to say -- this game sickens my heart. It really does. I realize the importance of free speech, free press, free thought, free assembly, etc. I suppose that extends to computer games as well. But ... I'm literally sad inside just writing this. I think a lot of the commentary that came out on this game wasn't from people who were even alive when the assassination happened.

The loss of the President of the United States. The loss of John F. Kennedy. The loss of the "Kennedy" years.

Each of these was and is a tragedy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.161.161.22 (talk • contribs)

• You should play it. As much as it may sicken you, you should try to realise that this is emphatically not designed to be fun. JFK Reloaded is far from a trivialisation of the events of November 22nd 1963, and to describe it as a "game" is stretching an already abused word too far. Rather, it is a complex ballistics simulator, designed to teach the "player" one thing: The official explanation of Kennedy's assassination is, if not physically impossible, so hard to reproduce as to be practically impossible. I admit, I'm only 25 and I'm not a US citizen, but I am interested in history and human rights, and no-one can deny Kennedy's massive influence as a force for good in the world, and the magnitude of his assassination in global terms. JFK reloaded is designed to allow the curious to investigate this seminal historical event more fully. YourMessageHere 18:51, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  • On the contrary, I find it quite fun (as did most of the other people at the forum where I got it). It's a very well designed given how limited it is, and there's a fair degree of humour to be found in the erratic AI behaviour. I actually wouldn't mind seeing a sort of "snipers of the world" expansion with multiple scenarios. Bear in mind I'm not an American and don't care much about JFK. ShardPhoenix 12:43, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

It may be "fun", but it's NOT "fun" because you're shooting JFK. That was the YMH's point, I think, and I hope you would agree. "Playing" JFK Reloaded is not totally unpleasurable, but it's not because you're going, "Yeah! Die you liberal bastard!" (as some people may think is the point of this game -- horrible twisted people, presumably). It's categorically NOT about that. For me, I was very happy to finally see for myself that not only was it possible for Oswald to have committed the crime, but it was also highly likely that he did. That allows me to get on with my life and stop worrying about conspiracy theories surrounding the assassination, and also mourn JFK's death without getting caught up in confusing myths. That's what I got from it, at least. Johnny "ThunderPeel2001" Walker (talk) 15:42, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

• I had thoughts similar to that of the first poster before I played the the game, but its no more than a historical study tool, me thinks. Sure, some werid people can (excuse my language) 'get off on it' but to normal people, I think its just a historical simulator. When the game first booted up, and the screen said "Dalley Plaza, November 22rd, 1963" I got chills down my spine, and again when the motorcade came around the building. Its an absolute creepy and bizarre feeling. -- CaptainAmerica

• It's just a game..albeit a fun one considering its impossible to win. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.135.66.35 (talk) 04:42, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Purpose?

According to the company, the primary purpose of the game is to help prove that the Warren Commission's theory is correct, and to debunk all of the alternate theories.

That's wierd, I would think their purpose would be the exact opposite, given how hard it is to replicate the actual shots. No one won the contest, right?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Liu Bei (talk • contribs) 16:06, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Not only did nobody win, it's actually impossible-even though Traffic Games actually CHEATED to make it easier. It's impossible to die just from a high number of wounds-you have to actually hit in a critical point. Bullets riochet more easily than they do in reality. The scope is not mis-calibrated, as Oswald's was.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.240.105.38 (talk • contribs) 12:27, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

You're obviously not aware of the disputes surrounding the assassination. Theorists often claim that it was impossible for anyone (let alone Oswald) to have shot JFK from that angle, and that he was clearly shot from the Grassy Knoll. Not only does this simulator support the Warren Commission's findings of a "lone gunman" shooting from the Book Depository (THAT was their finding), it was designed to do so. You've clearly missed the point of 50 year's worth of discussion by amateur theorists, if you don't understand this. Johnny "ThunderPeel2001" Walker (talk) 15:48, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

It's fairly obvious that Oswald's scope got mis-calibrated when he dropped the rifle and fled the scene, not beforehand. I mean, the man was a Marine sharpshooter. He knew what the fuck he was doing. 72.224.126.139 12:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Release Date Fixed

The release date on Wikipedia was November 22nd, 2004. However according to JFKaos, it was released November 21st, 2004.

On the official site it states it was released on November 22nd. Official Site. Johnny "ThunderPeel2001" Walker (talk) 15:50, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

JFKaos Link Restored

The site is active, and as noted above contains accurate and valid data regarding JFK Reloaded. Note that this site also includes the only commentary on JFKR and the controversies it caused from anyone at Traffic since their site went offline. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.90.148.162 (talk) 04:14, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

It's a self-published fan site that shouldn't be linked to without concensus (WP:VG/EL, WP:EL). Marasmusine (talk) 09:16, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. This is nothing more than a fan site and is not suitable as primary source material. It should NOT be linked to. Johnny "ThunderPeel2001" Walker (talk) 15:51, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Critical Reception...

...has no critics cited. Just two politicians and a children's safety organization. Can we get some actual gaming critics cited here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.60.53.190 (talk) 00:30, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure it was ever reviewed by the mainstream press, mostly because it's not really a game. Johnny "ThunderPeel2001" Walker (talk) 15:52, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Any comments from non-politically motivated people and organisations, or from forensic experts? What did the original investigation team have to say about this? - Redmess (talk) 17:57, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Oswald and "allegedly"

Re this edit: the reason why the plaque on the Book Depository uses the word "allegedly" is because Oswald died before a trial could take place, and a commission or inquiry cannot produce a guilty verdict. The word "allegedly" is not ideal on Wikipedia because it can be seen as casting doubt on the statement. However, it is important not to imply that Oswald was ever found guilty in a court of law.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:29, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I believe this is the second reference to WP:PLAQUE; the first occurring in Talk:Lee Harvey Oswald/Archive 9#Use of Alleged (@Gamaliel:) - Location (talk) 05:36, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on JFK: Reloaded. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.cool.com.au/computers-technology/personal-computers/jfk-reloaded-revisited-20060414256/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:23, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Older Comments

how does this game have a mature rating? I don't think it was submitted to the ESRB or the Canadian or European counterparts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CaptainAmerica (talk • contribs)

Has Traffic Games really folded or is this blind speculation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.3.225.150 (talk • contribs) This game got a Teen rated for blood and gore — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larryeedwards (talk • contribs) 16:09, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Article title should drop the colon

The game's name does not include a colon, check the logo and the official website.Ugly Ketchup (talk) 20:11, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Agreed, the game's title screen does not have a colon.[1] However, I can't move the page myself so an admin will have to do it.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 21:03, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

• The change to JFK: Reloaded was done in November 2004.[2] It is unclear why this was done, because it isn't the official title of the game.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 21:14, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 25 February 2017

JFK: Reloaded → JFK Reloaded – The game title does not have a colon in it, see above ♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 21:07, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:JFK Reloaded/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AryKun (talk · contribs) 10:27, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

This is an interesting topic, to say the least.

• Does score need to be linked? It's a pretty common concept.
• Does points need to be linked?
• "the grassy knoll. the" → Comma instead of period.
• "conspiracy theories surrounding the event" → Link this whole phrase instead of just "conspiracy theories", otherwise it looks like a general link to the latter.
• "United States senator" → Capitalize Senator.
• I don't see the need to add the ABC News and Maxim stuff, it's just clickbait-y stuff that isn't really relevant. AryKun (talk) 05:13, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

  Thank you, AryKun. I believe the capitalization of 'Senator' is correct here per MOS:JOBTITLES, though I slightly reworded that bit to make the sentence more readable. I also made the other changes you requested. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 07:08, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:01, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the video game JFK Reloaded recreates the assassination of John F. Kennedy from the perspective of the killer? Source: "The conspiracy game: JFK's assassination is turned into computer entertainment" (#3 in the article) – "From the sixth floor window of a virtual reality book depository in Dallas, Texas, anyone with a computer and about £6 can take the place of Lee Harvey Oswald and relive the infamous assassination."
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Woodleigh MRT station

Improved to Good Article status by IceWelder (talk). Self-nominated at 10:03, 21 January 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Recent GA article is long enough and well sourced with no significant copyvio. Hook is cited and interesting. qpq is done, so this one's ready. BuySomeApples (talk) 20:23, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

---

Promoting the main hook to Prep 2 – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:01, 29 January 2022 (UTC)