Talk:Phantasy Star

Missing titles

Why doesn't this page make any mention of the Phantasy Star Portable titles, or the Zero titles, or indeed a whole raft of other PS games? You guys have really dropped the ball compared to the Final Fantasy guys who have an entire list of every FF game ever made. Poor show. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.149.169.86 (talk) 11:29, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Release Info

Why has someone stated that Phantasy Star Generation 1 will soon be released in North America? SEGA have never stated that it will be.

Phantasy Star Generation 1 was originally meant to be released independently from the other two remakes by Conspiracy Games in North America. As the story goes, Sony Computer Entertainment of America told them that the game 'wasn't high enough quality to be released on its own.' It boggles my mind, personally; I've seen a lot of the other stuff they've approved. VanGarrett 01:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

The history section claimed that Phantasy Star (Dec. 20, 1987) beat Dragon Quest (May 27, 1986) and Final Fantasy (Dec. 18, 1987) to the market, which isn't the case, so I altered this. -Jonas

Perhaps the author was thinking of the North American release. Unless I'm mistaken Phantasy Star was released in North America before the other two. Priest4hire 07:44, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

You aren't mistaken. It was out before the other two in the US. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.75.40.170 (talk) 06:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC).

The Fan Contributions section is disjointed and either needs to contain more information or be cut completely. The second sentence isn't even a complete sentence, nor is it capitalized.

PSU planet confusion.

Someone made a poor assumption when they added Parum to the list of names for Palma, and Moatoob to the list of names for Motavia. Parum and Moatoob are planets from Phantasy Star Universe, rather than from the classic series, and there is no clear connection between the classic series and the Universe series; nor does the classic series' storyline offer any room to indicate that the Gurhal system is, in fact, the Algol system. The classic series featured a temperate planet, a desert planet and an ice planet. PSU features two temperate planets and a desert planet. The number of planets is consistent, I suppose, but in the timeline of the original Phantasy Star, settlement of Motavia and Dezolis was something that had occured within the lifetimes of mid-aged people. Phantasy Star Universe's timeline has the settlement of Neudaiz and Moatoob at several hundred years prior to the begining of the game; the three planets have been settled long enough for the three daughter-races of the humans, Cast, Newman and Beast, to have waged a 500-year war against their creators to secure equal-rights.

With Palma having been destroyed in Phantasy Star 2, for Gurhal to be Algol, Phantasy Star Universe would have to take place possibly hundreds of millenia prior to the original Phantasy Star; long enough for at the very least, the Beast and Newman races to become extinct (or at the very least, to evolve into Motavians and Dezolians respectively; though to go from human-skinned and long-eared to green-skinned and earless, that is beyond me), the Cast race to be torn down from their position of supremacy and subsequently made to be the subserviant slaves of the human race they were to begin with, and most importantly, long enough for any apparent civilization on Moatoob to vanish, as well as for Neudaiz to freeze over. The differences are just too great. If the classic and Universe series are even in the same universe, they are clearly, at the very least, different solar systems. VanGarrett 01:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Agreed its homage and nothing more. Numans werent created until Phant 2 and it cant be after because Palma was destroyed. Also the Seed Infestation is coming from outside of the Gurhal system not from a Seal within the actual system itself (PsyGuy 2nd 13:26, 16 March 2007 (UTC))

Fan Controversies

Admittedly there WAS confusion about Lutz's gender and the Noah moniker but this has long since been cleared up due to the fact we KNOW the original creators always intended him to be called Lutz. Noah is the name of the Earthmens ship in Phant 2 nothing more.(PsyGuy 2nd 13:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC))

Well... First off... The article lists simply that it was a source of conflict, which is true. As for it being cleared up... no, it's not. There are still those who will argue that Noah is not Lutz. Mike Ripplinger's defense of that position has always been quite thorough, and as far as I know, he's still unmoved from it (though he has long since left the Phantasy Star community). I believe that Maxx also stands by Noah and Lutz being separate individuals. You have to remember that the argument gets brought up that what the original Japanese writers intended has very little bearing on what was created when it was localized. You have to maintain the knowledge that though there are a great deal of similarities between the Japanese Phantasy Star and the English-language Phantasy Star, there are still a great deal of subtle differences, as well. I submit that it's best to look at it in a similar context to Greek mythology; there are multiple versions of the stories, but none is really any more true than another.

So no, as silly as it is, it still hasn't been resolved. VanGarrett 23:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Just because two high-profile (and when it comes to theories, highly questionable) people refuse to submit to logic doesn't mean it hasn't been resolved in the community at large. BenoitRen 21:53, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

It doesn’t need to be resolved. The canon is what matters and Even in US version Noah is Lutz:

Lutz killed LaShiec: Rune said the first generation lutz killed lashiec. Also the 1st generation lutz is lutz from PS2. Why? Because

in PSIV Rune clearly stated that the first generation lutz placed the aeroprism in soldiers temple. We know the last person who used the aeroprism was Rolf (Lutz gave it to him), so 1st generation Lutz recovered the prism and placed it in soldiers' temple until Rune and Chaz came to get it.

It could not be any other Lutz, if so it would be called "2nd generation lutz" since lutz from PS2 was already named "lutz". Unless of course, you believe that Noah (1st lutz) was still alive after PSII... but since in PSII Lutz stated that he was the last telemental of Algol, that's not possible.

What's wrong with these guys?

I would agree with this point if this was an ambiguous subject, but it isn’t'... so we shouldn't give any credit to that. There is a lot more interesting information to write in this article. 213.63.2.46 (talk) 14:52, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

List cleanup

The Games list doesn't need cleanup at all. It's complete and thorough. I don't understand why anyone tagged it. BenoitRen 21:53, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Rykros mention

I'm not sure Rykros should be mentioned on the page. It's a huge Phantasy Star IV spoiler. There isn't even a spoiler tag. Sure, Wikipedia is a source of information, but that doesn't mean it has to spoil everything when it comes to creative works. This tendency irks me. BenoitRen 21:53, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Spinoffs

Phantasy Star Online and Phantasy Star Universe are clearly spin-offs within their own universe and timeline. So I don't think the article should claim that they're part of the main timeline. BenoitRen 21:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Ps2 darkforce.gif

Image:Ps2 darkforce.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Algo1.gif

Image:Algo1.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Rykros1.jpg

Image:Rykros1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Dezo1.jpg

Image:Dezo1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:37, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Palm1.jpg

Image:Palm1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 14:53, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Mota1.jpg

Image:Mota1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 15:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

PSU's planets removed

I removed the mentions of Phantasy Star Universe's planets from the listing of Algol's planets, as they don't belong there, since they're not the same planets.

If this page is to cover PSO's and PSU's universe in addition to the original Phantasy Star games', sections should be added for them. BenoitRen (talk) 23:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Massive Revisions

I have completely expanded this article so that it's not just a list of games in the series, but rather also provides a summary of each game, and how it fits into the Phantasy Star continuum as a whole. There was a section on "Prevailing themes" that had been commented out for some reason, and I've temporarily restored that because it seemed relevant, although I will go over it within the next few days to remove any POV and to clean it up if necessary. Other additions include:

1. Phantasy Star Compendium section
2. Phantasy Star Memorial Drama section
3. Images for each game (also placed into main articles where they weren't present already)

Things still needed:

1. Expansion of Series development history

Godheval (talk) 15:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Use of Images

User Megata Sanshiro seems intent on railing against various edits I've made throughout the PS series of articles - and without discussion - another being the addition of the non-free template to the top of this page. I have removed it once, and will do so again, but figured I'd offer an explanation before I did so. He cited the WP:NFCC guidelines, but nowhere on that page does it say that the use of the images in this article are in violation. The article is not using any more than ONE copyrighted image from each topic it is covering. As the overall subject matter of the article is broad, it can be expected to use multiple images. My final argument for the use of the images is that they improve the aesthetic quality of the article. Any re-addition of the non-free template without a discussion will be regarded as engaging in a senseless revert war, and may warrant administrative intervention. Godheval (talk) 14:27, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

You just stated why this page violates the non-free content policy they improve the aesthetic quality of the article is a clear violation of the policy, see WP:NFCC#3 and WP:NFCC#8. I will shortly be removing the violating images. β^_command 14:48, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Beat you there. These images are not warranted, at all. It's exactly the same as how we do not have album covers in discographies or screenshots in episode lists. Sure, it may look nice, but non-free media should be used as a last resort- the use here is not absolutely needed. The covers are already in the main articles, they are not important enough to warrant the use of non-free media to illustrate brief synopses of the games. J Milburn (talk) 14:52, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

How completely dull. Yet another example of how excessive rules supercede common sense and plain good taste. Any well-formatted article on this same subject would undoubtedly feature the box-art from each game, or a screenshot. Oh well, leave it to the e-cock strokers of Wikipedia to drain me of all interest in contributing. I concede. You win. Congrats. Stroke on.—Godheval^{T C W} 14:56, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

You have a rather warped view of common sense if you believe that stealing images from others to decorate an encyclopedia is the "common sense" solution and in "good taste". If you have an issue with our guidelines on non-free content, raise it on the appropriate talk page. That generally achieves a little more than throwing around pseudo-insults at no-one in particular. J Milburn (talk) 15:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I knew it was coming? What, your swift retribution in undoing my response? OUCH, that really hurt. This stuff is better than stand-up, I swear. But anyway, here's the kosher version of my response, because I actually did have a point in all of that vitriol. I am no more "stealing" images than the IGN or Gamespot or 1UP article that does the same thing. Even Sega itself would not complain about the use of these images in this way, as the article only promotes their product.—Godheval^{T C W} 16:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Please note that our definition of fair use is stricter than the ones of US law. In fact, I from a legal standpoint, wouldn't see any problem in gaming sites using the cover art to promote the product, since that's partially the intended use, kinda like a logo. ViperSnake151 15:24, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Phantasy Star Zero, is this a prequel to the first game or is it unrelated to the main series?

this article doesn't seem to have Phantasy Star Zero on it. UNKN0WNUN1D3NT1F13D (talk) 13:48, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

When someone who's better at writing articles than i am get to it, it will be up. The game takes place in an entirely new world. (PSO-World.com) Lord GaleVII (talk) 20:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll add it once more details surface. Right now we don't know anything about the game, such as whether or not it is an entirely new continuity, or part of PSO or PSU. If it is the start of an entirely new series, it will receive it's own separate section, and category on the PS template.
—Godheval^{T C W} 15:43, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Prevailing themes inaccuracy.

I noticed that the section on 'prevailing themes' includes this portion:

"The Dark Force (Romanized to Dark Falz in the early American versions of the original Phantasy Star) seems to have chosen the Algol star system as its particular plaything,"

Anybody who's played the entire original series, as I have, knows that Dark Force didn't exactly 'choose' Algol as its 'plaything.' For the sake of preventing spoilers, I won't go into the true origins, but most of us that have finished the series should know the above is not true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.54.97.187 (talk) 22:00, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

The phrase is correct, then: that is what Dark Force seems to have done. Its true nature and purpose are only revealed near the end of Phantasy Star 4. Indeed, let's avoid spoilers! -- Stormwatch (talk) 09:37, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

You know, when I first did the massive revisions to reorganize this page, the prevailing themes section was commented out by a previous editor. I restored it after a once-over, thinking that it had at least some merit. But after reading it more thoroughly just now, I realized that it had a lot of POV, spurious speculation, and god-awful wordy bullshit. Seriously, it was ridiculous. It even used the term "Game scholars", and I'm pretty sure there is no such thing. Anyway, I trimmed it down to be concise and relevant, rather than some self-celebratory rambling. —Godheval^{T C W} 03:33, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Redirect notice

There was a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 102#Redirect_games.3F about three games related to the series and the consensus was to redirect. This page should have received a notice (for those who follow the series articles), so I wanted to at least leave a note for posterity. czar ♔ 07:36, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Phantasy_Star_II_Text_Adventures#Redirect? contains a comment from H Hog who was also concerned about the redirecting. I did not see that there was any discussion to redirect them prior and I am working on them, but I find it particularly bad that they are being redirected AGAIN while I am working on cleaning them up and adding citations to the different articles.[1][2] I've asked for the images which were fair-use and deleted after the merger to be restored as well at the undelete board. The details on the games are a bit hard to dig up online... but its not impossible and I think the fact we have some reception for these that is cited online helps. I got the score from Famitsu's site which had the rating from 1992, its not the mag, but it'll do. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 07:53, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Like i said, famitsu is the only thing you're going to find as far as "reception". and even though H Hog contested to it, they were still not notable, on there own. You could've at least made a space so it would be more safer. Because consensus was reached before.Lucia Black (talk) 07:57, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Spin-offs

This is because of the redirects of the spin-offs have been reverted. They don't really meet notability. They should all redirect back to the main page. Unless you have found reliable third party and first party sources. such as development and reception. And I've checked both Japanese and English sources before even suggesting delete. So its not like i thought they weren't notable and decided to delete.Lucia Black (talk) 07:11, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Phantasy Star. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6FLIKp5X0?url=http://www.gamespy.com/articles/493/493224p1.html to http://www.gamespy.com/articles/493/493224p1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080210102534/http://home.att.net/~RACapowski/PS/comtrans.htm to http://home.att.net/~RACapowski/PS/comtrans.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071016184003/http://g-wie-gorilla.de/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=161&Itemid=18 to http://g-wie-gorilla.de/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=161&Itemid=18

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:07, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Phantasy Star. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100831001559/http://guides.ign.com/guides/13022/index.html to http://guides.ign.com/guides/13022/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:42, 24 January 2018 (UTC)