Talk:Streets of Rage

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Sega task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Untitled

Please don't revert this page, as the previous version seems to be a copyright infrigiment. The text has been copied and pasted from SOR Online[1]. Unless the author gives his/her permission, we can't put it here.--Paraiba 08:00, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Fanfic?

Should the section on novels be included in the article? It seems more like fanfiction and advertisement to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.224.229.22 (talk) 01:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this, it's nothing more than fan-fiction. It may try and follow the story or whatever (wouldn't know, haven't read it), but it's not official in any way and probably shouldn't be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.42.208.183 (talk) 14:32, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree. They are unofficial, VERY loosely based on the actual series, and the stories themselves have many plagarized claims against it. - ChrisGuy

Mr X

I support merging Mr X into this article and truning the Mr X page into a disambiguation page... Mr X could also refer to Homer Simpsons online pseudonym. Usrnme h8er 11:28, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

SOR2 Edit

I made a pretty minor change in the SOR2 section (added last sentence). I'll try to add more to this article when I have the chance. Shenzhou

Objectivity

This article reads to me like a fan's review, i would suggest it needs to be cleaned up to provide information about the game (good and bad points) not review it

I'm plotting a major overhaul of both this and the three games pages. Stay tuned. -- Truncated 13:38, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see much purpose for this page. Its mostly in-universe character descriptions and plot summary. You could easily merge the non-in-universe info like comics and soundtracks to their respective pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonny2x4 (talk • contribs) 07:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Max

The characters section lists Max as being famous for various moves, including the Atomic Drop. It claims that the Atomic Drop does more damage than any other move, but max has another attack where he places them in a headlock which does much more damage (albeit through several hits, it's all one attack). I'm not going to change it just now, I'm simply saying that I don't feel that information to be accurate. DarkTechnomancer 05:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point but there is one thing. The Atomic Drop does damage all at once and the headlock does damage in small amounts meaning that the headlock attack can be stopped before he is able to finish. S0nicLightning 13:52, 30 March 2010 (UTC)S0nicLightning[reply]

There is now a Bare Knuckle Mobile game

http://www.andriasang.com/e/galleries/2008/09/25/bare_knuckle_mobile/ Though, only two characters and the older style. Thanks, Marasama (talk) 00:01, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Streets of Rage Remake

Just wondering why there's no mention of the remake project or how Sega shut it down just before it was released. Kotaku and other gaming news sites gave the game (which is a compilation of SOR 1,2 & 3 plus extra content) glowing reviews and also covered the decision of Sega to axe it. (203.27.52.235 (talk) 05:52, 28 November 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Question about Streets of Rage Remake and Rudra

Is Streets of Rage Remake technically a fangame? If so, does that make Rudra a fanmade character? 69.118.251.97 (talk) 23:21, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and also yes. --Jtalledo (talk) 11:15, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"A Remake for PC, titled Streets of Rage: Remake was released by Bomber games in 2011, the game is a mixture of all SoR/BK games and is considered a sequel of SoR 3."

It was a fun remake, but does this really belong in the article? It was officially shutdown by Sega, despite its completion. If its worth mentioning, it'd be more appropriate to say something like an unofficial (or fanmade?) remake was being developed, but was shutdown at Sega's request/demand. 69.118.251.97 (talk) 21:25, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 October 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: pages moved. Andrewa (talk) 08:10, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

– The Streets of Rage series seems to meet the following criteria on WP:NCVG:

"...If a video game series has a naming conflict solely with the first game in the series (e.g., Final Fantasy), the series page should reside at the primary name if the series possesses a minimum of 3 video game articles as well as at least one other unrelated video game or related media item. Otherwise, the first game in the series should occupy the primary name, and the series article should be disambiguated with "... (series)"."

...So, with that being said, should the series page be moved to the base title? Steel1943 (talk) 17:53, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Streets of Rage. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 08:11, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

release timeline

I'm ambivalent whether the release timeline visual adds much value, but having 26 vertical years without releases taking up a huge amount of space is really inconsiderate to mobile readers. Maybe there's a better way to visually express these releases? Schazjmd (talk) 19:50, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

100% agreed. The best way to represent release info is just in prose. Even a large paragraph would physically take up less space than that template. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:56, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]