Talk:Ultima III: Exodus

NES version

Removed from the article:

A chapter for itself is the conversion for the NES. Apart from the usual changes in complexity when converting to a console, and the changes of content, Nintendo's strange policies of that time transformed all the graphics into a childish-colorful anime-style, making the game look like a child's toy, and thus like something for little children. This is considered by most to be the NES version's most glaring flaw and the reason why it didn't fare as well as other console RPG's of the time.

...A good example of the rhetoric that shows that a bit of research and a good dose of neutrality would be in order. 1) Nintendo didn't have too many "strange policies"; Nintendo of America had a bit of a censorship policy at the time, but I challenge anyone to prove they had an animeification policy. Or maybe Europe got the translated-straight-from-Japanese edition of SMB3 and I'm completely ignorant of the American version that has Mario askingforaCHALLENNNNNNNNNGE!?? =) 2) Childitude and toyness = subjective, subjective, subjective. Compared to, say, Final Fantasy 1, the graphics aren't all that different. Quite different from the PC graphics, of course... 3) "Didn't fare as well as other console RPGs..." I was under the impression this version sold well in Japan. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 18:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

True, but ya know what? There's a grain of truth in the childishness of the NES version. The character tiles belong on the wall of a baby's room and the music in the mobile attached to the crib. I just don't know an encyclopedic NPOV way of saying that. I guess a reliable source should be found for that sort of thing. The "Ultima Anime" section of [1] is a hint of a reliable source. The Ultra-Mind (talk) 16:46, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Information overload

Nothing personal, Sega, but the gameplay expansion is an information overload for this page. Maybe you should create a seperate article.--Tribun 13:46, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Sure. That depends on the overall length we want our articles to have. By Wikipedia standards, it's still not a long article at all. Maybe we're used at shorter articles in this wiki. And BTW, I think the main games articles so far were TOO spare. We should decide, as a Wiki, how long we would like our articles to be, and if it is needed, split them up when they reach some size.--Sega381 15:08, August 1, 2010 (UTC)