Talk:Where's an Egg?

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Programming error: more clarification)
(Programming error: reply)
Line 440: Line 440:
*If you ask a liar about a person, the game checks to make sure that either randomly-chosen item is not the item at the current location or that the randomly-chosen place is not the current location.
*If you ask a liar about a person, the game checks to make sure that either randomly-chosen item is not the item at the current location or that the randomly-chosen place is not the current location.
Even though this error results in a slight advantage for the player, I don't believe it was intentional on the part of the programmer. Otherwise, instead of having the game check to see whether characters are the same as items, it just wouldn't check anything at all. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 16:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Even though this error results in a slight advantage for the player, I don't believe it was intentional on the part of the programmer. Otherwise, instead of having the game check to see whether characters are the same as items, it just wouldn't check anything at all. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 16:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 +
:But still, all the goof does is make the liar lie.  The only way it could possibly be known that it's a goof is by decompiling the Flash file and reading the script.  This would be like if they had a comment tag in a script that said <code><//-- make marsipans face turn red here --//></code>, and we listed the goof that they misspelled Marzipan.  The goof is irrelevant outside the code.--[[User:Antisexy|Antisexy]] 16:38, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
== Why are you reverting these edits? ==
== Why are you reverting these edits? ==

Revision as of 16:38, 18 August 2007

Contents

Character themes

I just noticed something. Every character has their own variation on the theme that plays in that person's presence. Whenever you ask a character about another character, or they answer a question about that character, that character's theme will be played along with the theme of the character you're speaking with. But when only items and places are involved in the question (or the occasional super-bad liar who answers a question with him/herself when it's patently not true), you'll hear only the one character's theme. --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 16:53, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Though sometimes it'll fail to play both themes together... --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 16:57, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh, yeah, and when you win, it'll play what sounds like all the themes together. --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 17:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Multiple endings

I've found that depending on how quickly I finish the games. So far, I've found four:

  • Fireworks only — 900 seconds or less left
  • Fireworks and a white satellite-looking spaceship — 901-940 seconds left
  • Fireworks, a white satellite-looking spaceship, and a yellow/brown spaceship — 941-970 seconds left
  • Fireworks, a white satellite-looking spaceship, a yellow/brown spaceship, and a gray/green spaceship with an alien coming out — 971 or more seconds left

I'm unsure whether there are any other endings for amounts of time left much smaller than the above. Trey56 17:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


My guess is that the 3rd one is a space lab and the "alien" that comes out is a cosmonaut performing a space walk.
I managed to win a few times just by shooting at everyone immediately. My best time is 994 and all I get is the sputnik, the rocket and the space lab.
Nsayer 18:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Those aren't just any "spaceships", those are definitely meant to refer to the Sputnik satellites.

The first is Sputnik. The second is probably Vostok 1, with Yuri Gagarin, the first human in space. The third is Voskhod 2, with Aleksei Leonov, the first human to perform a spacewalk. CaseyG 01:55, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Dead on - good work! They definitely appear to be celebrating Russia's "firsts" in space. First man-made satellite, first human in space, and first spacewalk. -ReverendTed 02:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I let the time run down to 96 before getting bored, and nothing unusual happened when I shot the culprit. So it doesn't seem there are any other endings. Why the heck they think people need as much time as they give is totally and utterly beyond me - the amount of time is ridiculously high and takes forever to run down! - but whatever. --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 05:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I let it run down to 001 and shot the culprit — just the normal ending. Also, I agree: 1000 seconds is unnecessary. I will say, though, that the first time I played it I was completely clueless, so it was nice that I could take my time stumbling around and trying to figure out what was going on. Trey56 08:46, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
This is Forum fodder primarily, but I'll briefly add that being timed out when learning a game is really frustrating and turns me off, and that may be a reason behind TBC's use of such a long timeout. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 09:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Locations, suspects, and items

Here are my attempts at identifying the locations, suspects, and items. I'm not sure of all of them, especially the ones with question marks. Trey56 18:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Locations

  • Aquarium
  • Forest
  • Museum (?)
  • Siberia (thanks, 70.116.132.84)
  • City
  • Desert
  • Beach
  • Movie theater
  • Pier

Suspects

Items

  • Egg
  • Potted plant
  • Strawberry
  • Beer
  • Pencil
  • Bomb
  • Duffel bag
  • Monkey wrench
  • Slingshot
  • Cat

I think once the locations, items, suspects are re-ordered, we can pull the stub tag off the article. Lots of great info and we have the basics now. wbwolf (t | ed) 22:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

The proposed Kid Speedy is still listed as "Red-haired boy" on the page. Also, he could be Ron Cumberdale instead. 72.133.214.202 04:51, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Item Talk

I have noticed, if people talk about an item when you question them about the egg, talk about the item. They will then tell you a person, and a place. If the person is at that place with the item, they usually have the egg. If they ARN'T at that spot, the one who gave you the info usually has the egg. Anyone have this not happen? (Notice I said USUALLY)--Bobmuffins 18:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

This is true, because all characters either always lie or always tell the truth 68.54.84.110 19:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Painfully dumb question...

How do you play the game if you don't speak or read Russian?

Actual game play requires no knowledge of Russian, since it done completely with pictures. The Russian writing is meaningless or poorly done, anyway. wbwolf (t | ed) 19:21, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

- Hey; erm, I have no real idea about wiki ettiquete but I just wanted to say that the Russian is all more or less correct and certainly not meaningless. Here goes: The title, 'gde yaitso' indeed means 'where is the/an egg?' (although the dash in the middle is not needed) - the reference to 'gde yaichko' that is made on the corresponding wiki article on this topic is wrong; 'yaichko' is a diminuitive form roughly equivalent to 'eggy'. 'Gde yaitso' i.e. as written in the game is the best translatoin for 'Where's an Egg?'. On the loading screen, 'televizionniy elektricheskiy' - 'televisual electrical' is fairly senseless but apart from that, the rest of the russian is correct. When you shoot the egg-haver, 'vinovnik' (criminal) appears, and then 'pozdravlenie' (congratulations). If you get it wrong, 'vinovnik' again appears, followed by 'gulag' (russians tend to use the simpler word 'lager but gulag is a russian acronym) and then 'igra zakonchenniy' - the only real example of incorrect grammar. It means 'game over' but should be 'igra zakonchennaya' to account for the feminine gender of 'igra'. Hardly 'meaningless or poorly done'. I was pretty surprised with the quality of the russian, to be honest

Since it clear you know Russian, and I definitely do not, I would bow to your superior knowledge. In this case, I would say writing up this information in the wiki directly would be much appreciated. (Perhaps under a translation section?) wbwolf (t | ed) 20:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

The Russian text is only used for the title screen and the "congraturatory" address. "Dialogue" in the game itself is handled through pictograms ("Blue Rabbit's Climate Chaos" comes to mind, although this is much more simplistic). Basically, you go around "investigating" each area, confirming which characters are where and which items they're holding, and questioning the characters about other characters and items; if you find someone who's lying, odds are he/she is the culprit, and you do what any good renegade Russian detective would: you shoot them! ^_^--Tenka Muteki 19:22, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I find that about half the suspects lie, whether they have the egg or not. But really, since everyone either always lies or always tells the truth, all you have to do is find someone who gives you a clue about the egg and says even one other true thing. (Don't bother asking anyone, truthteller or liar, about him/herself or his/her own item, though.) --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 20:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Too many colors

When you hover over a button, it gradients from gray to yellow (and back again when you remove) Thats waaaaay too many shades of yellow for a game like this. Maybe put this in remarks or goofs. I have bad edit etiquette :P

Hardly. I think the gradient is a nice touch, and it was definitely intentional, as part of the game. Definitely not a goof. The_3000th_Flare
This is a ridiculous claim, and I will have no part in this discussion... oh crap, I already did. So, best thing to do is... to go back and not listen to that message, and then we've got nothing to worry about. Oh, wait... in fact...
...tcaf ni ...tiaw ,hO .tuoba yrrow ot gnihton tog ev'ew neht dna ,egassem taht ot netsil ton dna kcab og ot ...si od ot gniht tseb ,oS .did ydaerla I ,parc ho ...noissucsid siht ni trap on evah lliw I dna ,mialc suolucidir a si sihT
Okay, there. I think I reversed it. What? What do you mean that doesn't work? Oh, crap. — Defender1031*Talk 18:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Screen shot

Since the game is out for reals and looks different from the preview shot that was originally up, shouldn't we use a screen shot of actual game play? Do we include both images on the page? wbwolf (t | ed) 20:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and replaced the old image with the new one, since that's what we did with Kid Speedy. Has Matt? (talk) 21:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Maid

Totally a butcher.

Which person is supposed to be the maid? Process of elimination of all the other characters left a person who appears to be a butcher.--Another Freakin' Guy Named Daniel 21:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC) Also, which one is supposed to be the movie theater? Process of elimination left what resembles the Lincoln Memorial.


I think the one with the red rope and yellowish wall is the movie theater.- 70.243.66.159 16:09, 17 July 2007 (UTC) (Everybody! Sorry, forgot to sign in...)

Ending Screen

That's not a police station, it's Lenin's Mausoleum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin%27s_Mausoleum)

Apparently we don't know too much 'bout Russia. Thanks for pointing that out! Has Matt? (talk) 21:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Also the word vinovnik (виновник) would be better translated as "guilty person". Criminal is prestupnik (преступник) in Russian.

We would probably use "culprit" in English.--Tenka Muteki 23:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

That "uniformed man" looks like Stalin [1]. Well, as much as 'good graphics' can allow, anyways ;). It's got his mustache. Given that the game seems to be set in Soviet Russia, there is more than a good chance that it's suppose to be Stalin. What does everyone else thing? — 67.71.64.144 (Talk | contribs) 23:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC) (left unsigned)

I'm all for it. It looks enough like him to me, and it certainly fits with the Russian theme. Trey56 23:57, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
It seems very likely. Bluebry 00:00, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone not think it's Stalin?
I think it could be, but are we sure enough for this not to be considered undue speculation? — It's dot com 01:07, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
To me, it has the following point for it being Stalin:
the setting is Soivet Russia
the medal is given out at Lenin's Mausoleum, and Stalin stood atop of Lenin's Mausoleum during the post-WWII victory parade (it's the kind of place a Soviet dictator would give out a medal)
The mustache and uniform look like Stalin's, and not like any other Soviet dictator (No other Soviet dictator had a mustach like that, although Lenin did have a goatee, he wasn't known for wearing a uniform and would, persumably, be in his tomb)
Stalin might actually want someone shot for stealing an egg (and I'm only half joking on that last one)
I don't see any points against it being Stalin. I cannot discount it being some other uniformed mustachio'd Soviet authority figure, like some head of the KGB or something, but no others come to mind
Does anyone know someone else that might fit that discritpion? — 67.71.64.144 (Talk | contribs) 02:12, 18 July 2007 (left unsigned)
I strongly oppose the idea that it's Stalin. It's just a guy in a uniform. There were many of those if Soviet Russia, Lenin's tomb was used by every Soviet leader for parades, and Stalin was dead years before those spacecrafts were launched. I also see absoluetly no persuavive reason why it should be Stalin. Loafing 04:56, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I see your point, but I don't think the timeline matters too much — John McEnroe wasn't even born when Sputnik was launched, for example. Rather, I think these other famous historical Russian appearances strengthen the case for it being Stalin. Trey56 05:14, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Stalin is in this game, but not the uniformed man. It's the man pictured immediately above this thread.
Were it not for the timeline, I would say it was certainly Stalin. Both the mustache and uniform are too close to be coincidence. Even with the timeline problems, I think Stalin is still the best fit. He is certainly the most obvious mustached man in a Russian uniform. In fact I can't think of any other who would be appropriate. — גשמלדרברגן (Geshmalder) 21:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
What is being ignored, perhaps, is the quote of Stalin's (though far from originally his) that "You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs." It is often falsely attributed to him. Do I really need to give you a google link to it?

Suspect and location images

While the suspect and location images were originally icons, they have now been overwritten with full-sized images. Personally, I prefer the icons for three reasons:

  1. The full body characters are much taller than the rest of the images, which makes the table look a little lopsided.
  2. The icon images are pixel-for-pixel, whereas there are some cropping issues with the full-sized images (compare the butcher icon with the full-body butcher) (fixed)
  3. We don't need to illustrate every component of the game completely, just give an icon for identification purposes.

Does anyone agree, or are we happy with the staus quo? Trey56 22:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I think the table is fine as is, especially with the ability to expand the locations to a larger size. Perhaps making the size of the icons closer to the same size (using the item icons as a guide)? wbwolf (t | ed) 22:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
The icons are fine by me, alhtough the cropping issues can easily be fixed. If you think reverting back to icons is the better choice, by all means, go for it. I don't see a problem with keeping the locations as full shots, however. —FireBird|Talk 22:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


Names of People, Places and iTems

Using a decompiler, the names are Jessifer, Pall, Brodermaker, Mancuso, Damella, Deark, Gubby, Les and Joeff. The places are called Seward Lane, Hollway, A Room, Gym, Bank, Gumption Road, Upstairs, Nearby and Under. The items are called Bottle, Ball, Butterfly, Dog, Gym Bag, Fanny Pack, Frying Pan, Candlestick and Laptop. Not sure which is which. I might have another look later on when I'm home from school. Loafing 22:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

That's crazy :P Especially since some of those names bear little resemblance to the items... Trey56 22:55, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm more surprised they put all the names there. By the way, nice work on the looking old reference. --TotalSpaceshipGirl3 23:57, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I have a Flash decompiler and I'm not finding these names anywhere in the image files. Where are YOU finding them? --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 02:13, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Never mind; I found them, but I see no indication of which is which, unless they define them in numerical order as the images appear (and who could tell - there aren't any bottles or balls to be seen anyway!) --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 02:19, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

The internal names Loafing listed don't appear to actually be used anywhere... the only time these lists of names are even mentioned is that the list of placenames is added to a non-existant (or no-longer-existant) drop-down list on the map screen (possibly a stub, before they made the pretty buttons?). They seem to only be there for debugging purposes. However, it's reasonable to assume that, as debugging tools, they're in the same order as the numerical ids that everything's stored with, which'll make them:

Places
Their name Our name
Seward Lane Aquarium
Hollway Park
A Room Icy Mountains
Gym Bank
Bank Beach
Gumption Road Desert
Upstairs City
Nearby Art Museum
Under Bridge
Items
Their name Our name
Bottle Wrench
Ball Beer
Butterfly Cat
Dog Slingshot
Gym Bag Pencil
Fanny Pack Gym Bag
Frying Pan Bomb
Candlestick Potted Plant
Laptop Strawberry
People
Their name Our name
Jessifer Blonde Woman
Pall Blue hat man
Brodermaker Old Woman
Mancuso Butler
Damella Mechanic
Deark Red hat man
Gubby Butcher
Les Kid Speedy/Ron Cumberdale
Joeff John McEnroe

It seems clear that these debugging names were used well before the current art was made... it's odd that the one named "Bank" is one after the real Bank, and the "Gym Bag" is one before the real Gym Bag... but that's the order they are in the Flash file. I don't think the names warrant mentioning in the article... which is why I made the full tables here on the talk page. --phlip TC 14:35, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

We should definitely keep our names in the articles; they're much clearer The_3000th_Flare 18:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
I think we should put TBC names in the Trivia section. TreeWithAChainsaw 14:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

The Manual

The manual page is really funny in the way, that its English translation is more correct then the original Russian text :)

  • The word at the top of the page "Узнать" (Uznat') is correct, it really does mean "Find out";
  • The line "Кто лежит?" (Kto lezhit?) is a mistake and actually means here "Who is lying on the ground?" rather then "Who is telling lies/lying?". This is because in English the verb "to lie" can mean both of those things, but in Russian it's "лежать" (lezhat') for "lying on the ground" and "лгать" (lgat') for "telling the lies/lying". So the line should be "Кто лжет?" (Kto lzhet?);
  • The line "Кто говорит правду?" (Kto govorit pravdu?) is correct, it does mean "Who tells the truth?";
  • The line "Кто имеет яйцо?" (Kto imeet yaico?) is a bit incorrect and means "Who owns an egg?". "У кого яйцо?" (U kogo yaico?) could be translated as "Who has the egg?"

Another note: The Arbat ST. (location of the seller) is a well-known street in Moscow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbat_Street).

This would be excellent information for the Some Type of Online Auction page, where the Arbat Street reference is already noted. wbwolf (t | ed) 00:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Musie Theater?

I'm quite confident that the image given the label "Theater" is actually the museum. It looks just like an art museum display and... not at all like a movie theater. The other one's kind of ambiguous as to WHAT it is, but I'm quite sure on the "Theater". --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 00:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

The other one looks like some kinda government building. Maybe if someone could translate the Russian on the building, it would shed some light on this? Has Matt? (talk) 00:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
For now, I swapped the Theater one (pictures with a velvet rope) in the correct place. (Compare with the theater in the movies) I did notice that the one current marked "Museum" has some Russian writing on it. If someone would translate that, in addition to finding out what how the image is marked internally, for now it's probably better to leave the images where they are. wbwolf (t | ed) 00:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
You... you swapped it from my swap. The one with the ropes looks more like an art museum. Why would the ropes be so close to the pictures otherwise? --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 01:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I have seen plenty of movie theaters that have velvet ropes along the walls; they are used when they have people line up before the start of movie for a major opening. The other picture is clearly not a movie theater, so we need to wait until we have further info. wbwolf (t | ed) 01:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
But who was it that called it a "movie theater" in the first place? US! There is no "further info" besides maybe someone with a flash compiler or a translation of the pillar building. --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 02:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Know what? Forget it. I don't want an edit war. I'm compromising with simple descriptions no one can dispute. --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 02:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

It looks from above that one of these (probably the one with the pillars) is a bank, but who knows with the weirdness of the rest of the names. Trey56 00:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

If the one current marked as Museum is indeed a bank, I would have no problem making the other a museum. Right now, it's unclear. wbwolf (t | ed) 01:29, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, so can we call the one with the velvet ropes a "Museum" now? -ReverendTed 03:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I think that sounds reasonable. At first, I thought it was a movie theater, but the more I look at it, the more those look like pieces of art. Especially the one on the left. Trey56 03:57, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
And y'know - who named that last one a "pier"? Looks more like a bridge to me. -ReverendTed 04:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

The gray one with what looks like "bEPER" on it is a bank. "берег" is Russian for "bank" according to some online English-Russian dictionary I just Googled. I submit that the one with the velvet ropes is an art musuem. -ReverendTed 02:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

About the museum one, I think it's an art museum. Homestar-Winner (talk) 12:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. — SamSF%20sig.jpgFisher (Come in, Lambert.) 12:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Glitch or not?

Someone on the forums mentioned a glitch where, if you click on the top left corner a lot of times as the game starts, you can win with a timer score of 000. This is only if the person in the aquarium has the egg. I tried it and it worked, but I'm not sure if it's really a glitch or not. Thoughts? Shwoo 03:55, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Additionally, each time I've done it (by clicking the area of the screen where the Aquarium icon and gun icon overlap) the timer freezes at 000, but at the "Win" screen the timer reads 999 and all three spacecraft appear. -ReverendTed 04:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Just reproduced it myself, although given other Flash-related artifacts like this, I imagine that the way-way-way-way-way-too-generous timer starts at 1000 and it just chops off the first digit... and perhaps drops it down to a normal value afterwards. --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 08:22, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Don't know if it's really a "glitch" if it only works when the suspect in the aquarium has the egg. That would make it more a matter of luck. — SamSF%20sig.jpgFisher (Come in, Lambert.) 12:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Glitches that only happen under specific circumstances are still glitches. --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 15:53, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but if the person in the aquarium has the egg, all you need to do is keep clicking the top left to finish the game in less than a second. That combined with the explanation you gave earlier about the timer actually being 1000 seconds, I think, completely disproves the glitch theory. — SamSF%20sig.jpgFisher (Come in, Lambert.) 19:34, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
The internal timer variable starts at 999 (which is what you see at the "win" screen), but the display in-game starts at 000 (not 1000) and is only updated a second after the game starts, the first time the "update timer" function's called. I think this qualifies as a minor glitch (namely that the display doesn't match the actual timer value for a second after the game starts). --phlip TC 12:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Here is a link to a video on youtube which shows someone winning when the timer displays 000. Don't press that button. 15:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't consider this to be a glitch — just somebody beating the game really quickly with 1000 seconds left on the clock (which looks like 000 because only three digits are permitted). Trey56 15:28, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
But it's not 1000 seconds left on the clock - it's 999 seconds (as you can see at the win screen). The "glitch" is that the timer isn't visibly incremented down until it gets to 998.-ReverendTed 03:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah. I just managed to do that, twice! But yeah, it's not visibly incremented until a few seconds after the start of the game. — ‪‪‪Znex 05:00, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Jack Orlando

Can anyone confirm the "Jack Orlando" Real-World Reference? The screenshots I've seen of that game look absolutely nothing like this one. -ReverendTed 03:59, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Dead People Tell Tales?

When I play the game, I killed someone and ask him about something and he replyed with a + sign. This should go into remarks I think. - Toonypie from the Fanstuff Wiki.

It's a red cross - they're only capable of answering questions with requests for medical aid, seeing as how they've been shot and all. Nsayer 18:45, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

5 Time win with no intention

I won 5 times in this game just by going around and shooting 3 random people. It was awesome. YOU should try it!-MikeControl

I think more people would be interested if you told them on the IRC channel. Homestar-Winner (talk) 19:29, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
You have a one-in-three chance of getting it right by shooting random people. Those aren't terrible odds, so your five times in a row was just luck. --Jay o'Lantern (Haunt) 00:13, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
That was sheer luck. I accidentally got 998 by clicking the gun after clicking the aquarium. --Jnelson09 01:52, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
(1/3)^5 = 1/243. That's some luck. — 68.121.111.150 (Talk | contribs) 12:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC) (left unsigned)
He never actually said he won five times in a row, just that he won five times. Has Matt? (talk) 12:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
38%, not 33%. 1/9 (.111) on the first shot, 1/8 (.125) to then get it on the second and 1/7 (.143) to then get it on the third. 37.9%. Big deal you say? .379^5 is 1/128. But yeah, don't know that it was five consecutive.--71.203.169.248 07:14, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
No, it's 33%. You're picking three of nine. If you really want to compute it the hard way, you have to take into account the probability of choosing incorrectly on the first and second tries. So, there's a 1/9 (.111) chance of being right on the first try, a 8/9 * 1/8 (.888 * .125) chance of being wrong on the first try and right on the second try, and a 8/9 * 7/8 * 1/7 (.888 * .825 * .143) chance of being wrong twice and then right. Add them all up and you get -- surprise, surprise -- a .333 chance of winning by shooting at random.

Fabergé eggs?

When you talk about Russian eggs being stolen, it's almost certain that this is a reference to Fabergé eggs. Nsayer 18:36, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I guess it could be a reference to Fabergé eggs. But it could also be TTATOT. User talk:Sam the Man Sam the Man 18:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I think the egg being stolen is just a joke (because no one would shoot a person to get back a stolen egg). Homestar-Winner (talk) 19:04, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
It could also be a reference to comunism (sp?) where nobody is allowed to have more than anouther person. TreeWithAChainsaw 14:51, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Strategy shortcut

Because they cannot provide you with useful information, it is worthwhile to shoot the first two suspects you know to be lying. One of them might just have the egg.

I'm not sure why this keeps getting removed. It seems like a reasonable strategy to me. After you've played the game a bit, you know you really only need one bullet. The other two are just going to waste. Why not use them on the liars? Their info is no good, and you may get lucky and finish with a better time. If it doesn't work out, then you've still got your last bullet to use in the conventional way. — It's dot com 21:32, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

What's a waste of time is shooting suspects who may not have the egg. It's much better to be sure who the real culprit is than to leave it to luck, even if it turns out to be someone you've seen before. Like this trick I use. — SamSF%20sig.jpgFisher (Come in, Lambert.) 21:37, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
It takes just over one extra second to shoot the liars. That seems an acceptable tradeoff for the amount of time it would take to keep going normally. — It's dot com 22:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Well of course you can use any other strategy and just shoot any liars you come across. But that doesn't make this a strategy in itself. Any player could simply decide to do that; it doesn't take any real thought. — SamSF%20sig.jpgFisher (Come in, Lambert.) 22:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
No real thought? Au contraire! The suggestion is not to shoot people indiscriminantly, but to shoot the first two liars you see (which takes some determining). You're not going back to a location where a liar is anyway—unless you have to confront the egg holder there. You could save a lot of time by going ahead and using your spare bullets before you leave the location. — It's dot com 00:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Uh, that's exactly what I just said. This does not take any "real thought" because it is not a strategy as much as it is an add-on to another strategy. Yes it takes "some determining" to recognize liars, but methods for doing so are described in any strategy (including strategies we don't know). And it is not "worthwhile" to shoot the first known liars because it is so uncertain whether they would actually have the egg; the point of a solid strategy is ensuring correctness. — SamSF%20sig.jpgFisher (Come in, Lambert.) 14:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Note that the way the game works, you don't lose anything for shooting innocent civilians, except the brief second it takes for the detour of the mouse. You only lose out if you get it wrong three times. So a strategy doesn't have to be certain or get it right first time to be "correct" or "worthwhile". The only thing you're graded on is how long it takes you to find the right culprit, on your third guess or better. Anything that speeds that up is worthwhile. Just 'cause shooting people "just in case" or guessing in detective work is generally considered a bad idea in real life doesn't mean it isn't sensible in the context of the game. --phlip TC 14:40, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm inclined to agree with It's dot com. You don't lose anything if you shoot two liars, except maybe a second, and the odds of getting lucky and shooting the guilty party are not all that bad. Additionally many people would not necessarily think of "Wasting" bullets on innocent civilians, so it is a worthwhile thing to record. — גשמלדרברגן (Geshmalder) 20:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I added a new strategy paragraph dealing with an observation I made regarding "bad liars". I wasn't really sure if it might be considered a goof or if it was obviously intentional. Specifically, I had the Old Lady answer "potted plant" to two different suspects and then answer with her own picture when questioned about two different items that were not her own. Additionally, I had a later session where a character indicated the mechanic when asked about the beer, but when asked about the mechanic, answered "pencil". I'm starting to wonder if all liars will have some sort of inconsistency in their stories. And does anyone know if the Egg Haver is always a liar? -ReverendTed 06:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I recently did no less than 20 trials in a row. Every single time the person with the egg was a liar. Short of decompiling the flash, which is beyond my ability, I'm not sure if there is a way to truely know, but 20/20 seems pretty convincing. One other thing I paid attention to was if the person with the egg reliably pointed at someone else. More often than not, he was a "?," but considering most people are "?" I suspect this isn't an indicator.
Assuming that the egg holder is alway a a liar, which I have come to belive he is, and considering that there are generally 3-4 liars, you have a 2/3-2/4 chance of discovering the egg holder just by shooting liars, which I'd say is actually a pretty decent strategy.
Sometimes this strategy of discovering liars gives some amusing results, The most amusing one I encountered though was a liar who said he was the person with the egg, but didn't have it.75.180.26.208 08:12, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, I've decompiled it and am browsing through the script now. I'm not a professional programmer, but some of it is fairly straightforward. Interestingly enough, I think I've already found a programming error that explains a strange response I documented earlier. The code that tells a liar what suspect to answer when questioned about an item checks that the random answer doesn't match the liar's "item ID" instead of correctly checking against the liar's "suspect ID". This means that a liar can answer with their own face when questioned about an item that isn't theirs. That's definitely a glitch. -ReverendTed 17:31, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
No, it isn't. It is indeed a lie to say you have it when you don't. I suppose one could argue that it would have been better to program it so no one falsely incriminates themselves, but that's hardly a glitch. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 18:45, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, here we go - each section of the decompiled script has checks to ensure that a liar does not give their own location, item, or photo (or the "correct" ones, for that matter) as an answer when questioned about another item or person. However, when a liar is questioned about an item, and is randomly assigned to answer with a photo (as opposed to a location), there is a check against an ITEM ID instead of a SUSPECT ID, which is incorrect. I'm adding the relevant items back into the article, and have posted the offending source code snippet to my Talk page, because I didn't want to clutter up this discussion page with it. -ReverendTed 18:57, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Subtitles?

I don't know if Where's an Egg? is one of the games that can be subtitled, but if so it could be neat to include approximate translations of the Russian...

My guess is that it's not possible to subtitle, though... Trey56 21:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Your guess is wrong. DEI DAT VMdatvm center\super contra 22:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, partially — I was only able to subtitle part of it, since the rest of the text is embedded in movie files, I think. Trey56 22:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Music

At the begining, when the Videlectrix logo apears, but before the guy shoots at it, the music playing is The Volga Boatmen's Song, traditional Russian song.

That's awesome. (I just verified it) Great find! Trey56 00:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Ron Cumberdale

The character listed as "Kid Speedy" has red hair, but the real Kid Speedy has brown/gray hair. Ron Cumberdale from Peasant's Quest, however, has the same shirt AND red hair. Edit? 75.119.20.104 01:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I think "Kid Speedy" is just an updated version of Ron Cumberdale. On second thought, I disagree. Look at these three photos.

The skin tone, dark red shorts, same darkred/white striped shirt, and red shoes all match. It's Kid Speedy. Bluebry 01:37, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

As the one who originally suggested it as Kid Speedy, I concur with the original. Awexome Cross 04:27, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree — I think it's Kid Speedy. Trey56 04:32, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I was agreeing with the first one. Awexome Cross 04:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I see. In that case, I disagree — I think it's Kid Speedy. He's fat and has shorts instead of pants... Trey56 04:32, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I just edited it and put Kid Speedy back but kept the Ron Cumberdale thing in. Basically, we don't know who it is unless someone got told it was Kid Speedy/Ron Cumberdale by TBC. They're the only ones who truly know. — ‪‪‪Znex 09:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I propose that it's "Kid Cumberdale" -ReverendTed 03:26, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
No way. That's totally Ron Speedy. (Jeepers, that sounds like a bad Golden Age superhero...) --DorianGray 03:28, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Ron Speedy IS Kid Cumberdale IN "Where's an Egg?", an epic tale of crime and corruption where Justice isn't all it's cracked up to be - coming soon to a theater near you! -ReverendTed 06:26, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Dynamic Music

Has anyone else noticed how there is a base music track, and depending on which suspect you are interrogating, changes the extra line on top of it? eg, when you're interrogating blue guy with red hat, there's a sliding squarewave melody, and at the end when you get the medal, it has all the lines.

Ummm...there's already a section about this back up the page. — ‪‪‪Znex

Explanation about the Missing Points in my Last Edit

If around one hour ago, you were wondering why that the red cross reply point and the Stalin point were missing, I can explain everything. Before, I think I reverted the page or something by accident to the last time that it had Kid Speedy in the characters thing and that version happened to not have those things. So sorry about that. Sorry. — ‪‪‪Znex

Not The Egg

It seems rather clear thar "an egg" has an integral article--it is refered to as such even in situations where "the egg" would be more appropriate, as it is clear this egg is the only egg in the game. --71.221.232.189 17:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Translation Error

This is not the first time there has been a synonym based mistranslation on the site. Here, they used the russian word for river bank instead of financial bank. In Unnatural, Bub's title in Jappanese was "Man of Concession" meaning compromise instead of vending. Think this should be mentioned?

Nah, it could be a word pun and TBC just did it because it means different things. — ‪‪‪Znex
I don't know whether it's noteworthy yet, but it is an interesting observation. TBC are obviously using some less-than-reliable method for generating their translations (although it makes me happy that they're trying to make stuff not just be gibberish). — It's dot com 01:44, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps they used Babelfish? — ‪‪‪Znex
Nah, it's not Babelfish, that translates "Bank" as "Крен" (kren). Google Translate translates it as "Банка" (banka). However, Google finds http://www.rustran.com/ which, although it translates "Bank" as "Банк", it translates "Who is lying?" as "Кто лежит?" and "Who has an egg?" as "Кто имеет яйцо?" – both are the wording used in eggction, and both are claimed to be wrong in that article. It even translates "Where's an egg?" as "Где - яйцо?", hyphen included. It's near the top of the Google results for "english russian translator" so I think it's reasonable to think they did a similar Google search, and used this site. I'm not quite sure how they got it to say "берег" but I'll keep prodding it. --phlip TC 02:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
I was the one who first noted the берег-bank thing, and I figured it out using a Russian-English dictionary I found using a Google search and plugging in "museum" and "bank" into it to see if anything matched the inscription on the building. I'll see if I can find that link and see if the rest of the stuff translates the same as well. Ok, I found it here [[2]] but, being a dictionary, it doesn't translate phrases - only single words. -ReverendTed 05:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
An older example of this situation is Strong Bad's "Stark Dålig" from little questions, since the latter word translates as "of poor quality". Heimstern Läufer 09:36, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


Sbemail Reference

There is no reference on the page anywhere to the sbemail that mentioned the game, i think it should be here

That is because none of the sbemails mention this game. – The Chort 17:30, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I think it was listed on a floppy disk once, but I've never seen those noted in Inside References elsewhere, so... -YKHi. I'm Ayjo! 18:46, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
It was on a floppy disk in the introductions for strongbad_email.exe Disc Three and Disc Five, but not in a Strong Bad Email. Has Matt? (talk) 19:09, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Decompiled Script Findings

I'm going to edit this as I find things in the decompiled script.

  • The suspect who has an Egg is always a liar.
  • A liar's answers are randomly assigned for each suspect and item and are checked to ensure they aren't accidentally "correct". They're also checked to ensure a liar doesn't answer with their own location, item, or picture, but the item-question photo-answer check has a programming error that causes it to malfunction. The way they are randomly assigned almost guarantees that there will be some sort of inconsistency in a liar's answers (two of the same answers for different questions, or logical breaks like "suspect A has item 1 but item 1 belongs to suspect B").
  • People have been suggesting that there are 3 or 4 liars per game, but the code seems to indicate 5 liars are assigned, meaning that there would be 5 or 6 liars per game depending on if it tried to assign "liar" status to the egg holder (who is already a liar). So far, my in-game tests are confirming this.
  • One honest suspect is selected at random to answer correctly about an Egg. Three additional suspects are then chosen at random (which could include the one already selected) to give an answer about an Egg, which will be correct or incorrect based on whether that suspect is honest or a liar. This means there will be 3 or 4 suspects who will give an answer about an Egg, and at least one will be correct.

-ReverendTed 19:29, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Programming error

"A programming error allows a liar to answer with their own picture when questioned about an item that isn't theirs". The liar always responds with a lie. How is it a goof that he lies and claims to own an item he does not? In traditional one-person-always-lies one-person-always-tells-the-truth logic puzzles, this is one way to out the liar, by asking him a question about himself. Nard 00:14, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you — I wouldn't call that a goof. Actually, I think it's pretty hilarious; one time the butler told me had the egg, so I shot him. He did not have the egg. Anyways, I agree, and I think that the fact should be moved to Remarks. Trey56 00:17, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
If it's something TBC could have avoided, Remarks, otherwise, Glitches. Bluebry 00:21, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Definitely not a glitch - how can we be sure this wasn't intentional to offer the player a strategic tool? It can be a remark, so long as we do not suppose it's a mistake, but just the way things were done. Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 02:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a goof - it's a programming error explained in the "Decompiled Script Findings" just above this section, and I've got the offending source-code snippet on my Talk page to prove it. -ReverendTed 03:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
You speak as if you're sure this was unintended. Can you really be so sure? Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 06:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
If it is a goof, then it's pretty dang minor if the only thing it does is make the liars lie. So what if you found a faulty code snippet? They probably noticed the mistake, then realized the mistake made it do what it was supposed to do anyway, and left it alone. It's certianly not worth mentioning a mistake that could only ever be noticed by ripping the Flash file to shreds.--Antisexy 06:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

After looking at the code, I agree with ReverendTed that this is definitely a goof. Here is the relevant part, in English:

  • You the player ask a suspect about one of the items.
  • The game randomly selects whether the suspect will reply with a person or a place.
  • If it selects to reply with a person, it then checks whether the suspect is a liar.
  • If the suspect is a liar, the game randomly chooses a reply.
  • The game first checks to make sure the randomly-chosen person is not the real answer to the question (otherwise the suspect wouldn't be lying).
  • Then it checks to make sure the randomly-chosen person is not the same as the item at the current location. For example, "Is the man in the red hat equal to the pencil?" (Notice it doesn't ask whether the man has the pencil, but whether the man is the pencil.) The answer to this question can never be true, and thus it is possible for a suspect to reply with their own face. For the question to make sense, the game should check whether the randomly-chosen person is the same as the person at the current location.

When the game makes similar checks in other places, the code is correct:

  • If you ask about an item and a liar replies with a place, the game checks to make sure the randomly-chosen place is not the current location.
  • If you ask a liar about a person, the game checks to make sure that either randomly-chosen item is not the item at the current location or that the randomly-chosen place is not the current location.

Even though this error results in a slight advantage for the player, I don't believe it was intentional on the part of the programmer. Otherwise, instead of having the game check to see whether characters are the same as items, it just wouldn't check anything at all. — It's dot com 16:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

But still, all the goof does is make the liar lie. The only way it could possibly be known that it's a goof is by decompiling the Flash file and reading the script. This would be like if they had a comment tag in a script that said <//-- make marsipans face turn red here --//>, and we listed the goof that they misspelled Marzipan. The goof is irrelevant outside the code.--Antisexy 16:38, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Why are you reverting these edits?

I keep seeing edits being reverted that are factual, including mine and someone else's, but removed because the game isn't "russian" when there is a lot of RUSSIAN stuff in the game.

  • Everything is written in russian.
  • The guy at the end is a pixel look alike of Josef Stalin.
  • The three spaceships that fly by are all russian made.
  • The three spaceships are a reference to Tetris, a russian video game.
  • The wiki itself explains that the game has russian references (read the damn article, especially the trivia section!)

The edits were...

  • The fact the game is in Russian meaning you can't understand what's going on and have to make guess work.
  • The fact that on the "Some Type of Online Auction" page a reference to the film Man With the Screaming Brain is made, and the specific reference is about a russian.

If you're going to remove our edits of things we found in the game based on Russia then remove ALL topics in the game based on russia. Which would include the whole article!

Explain yourselves!

-User:Skunk (I'm not logged in because this and others were quick edits.) (64.18.124.101 (Talk | contribs) 08:43, 10 August 2007)

The game doesn't require any actual knowledge of Russian to play, however. That's why. --DorianGray 08:47, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Furthermore, even if you did know Russian, you still would be quite clueless. --Mario2.PNG Super Martyo boing! 09:52, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Don't worry. It's not you. Despite the wording of the [HRWiki:Introduction|Introduction page], in my experience nobody is really allowed to contribute anything without undergoing an inordinate amount of nitpicking. I'll bet anyone $100 that if TBC themselves came to the site anonymously and made a correction that it would get reverted. Nsayer 15:36, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
I second that.
  • The main objective "Where's the egg?" is in Russian. Not being able to read that does make the game harder 'cause you have no idea what the crap is going on.
  • "Mobile is the future, my main man!" seems like a generic enough phrase, but if it's an exact quote, it's an exact quote. And furthermore, if the specific quote is about a Russian, it seems likely that it was intentional.
--Antisexy 16:41, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Nsayer: It's easy to propose that kind of bet, given that it can't be backed up at all. Let's examine two instances of anonymous editing on Ryan Sterritt's page. I believe that he or someone who knows him made this collective edit, the information from which is still in the article. In that case, the information was relevant to the article and easily verifiable, and the nature of the edit made it easy to trust its accuracy. On the other hand, look at this edit. It could have been added by Ryan, or it could be someone speculating. We have no way to know, since the editor didn't provide any information to support it. Thus, even though it might very well be true, it was removed. Surely you can see that we have to have some kind of standard for inclusion if we want our pages to be looked at as anything but haphazard guesswork. If you want to speculate, fine. We have these talk pages and the forum for that. But we should keep speculation in the articles proper to a minimum (and yes, we do make exceptions). Furthermore, you can't lump all anonymous contributions into one category. I'm all the time seeing anonnies make edits that are so good that they are encouraged to create an account. I myself was invited to join in the same manner.
Both you and Antisexy seem to be convinced that this editor is being unfairly beaten down by the Big Bad Wiki Machine. You don't even bother to look at the actual edits and judge them on their merits. Antisexy does at least attempt to address the edits specifically, but he's basing his arguments on what was written here on this talk page as opposed to what was put in the article. So let's look at the diffs themselves:
  • Rev 487612: Meh, maybe this could have been reworded rather than being removed outright, but as written it's not really accurate. The game is actually played entirely through pictures, not another language per se. The Russian is just a red herring.
  • Rev 487270: Never mind the fact that auction has its own page, "What is up, my main man?" is not the same as "Mobile is the future, my main man!". "My main man" is a common enough phrase (and Man with the Screaming Brain is an obscure enough movie) that I firmly believe it's a coincidence. If you convince enough people otherwise, or that the coincidence itself is worth noting, then we'll note it, but if not then we've got to draw the line somewhere. Maybe you think a lot of speculation is good for articles. I, however, think it just waters them down.
It's dot com 19:27, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
I did look up the actual edits and considered how well they fit in the article. I didn't see what was so wrong with them. The latter more so than the former, though.
  • Rev 487612: "The game recreates the trial-and-error aspects and confusion of playing games in another language." Pretty much exactly what I thought when I first played it. There's certainly a lot of trial and error in figuring out how to play this game. And although there's no Russian during the actual gameplay, the Russian before and after adds greatly to the confusion. Heck, after the game was over, I wasn't even sure if I'd won or not.
  • Rev 487270: This one is so minor, that even if it was intentional, it doesn't really need to be noted. I've never heard of Man With the Screaming Brain. And "mobile is the future, my main man" seems like a common enough phrase. But if it is an exact quote, and in the movie, they are talking about a Russian, that I think that'd be to much for just a coincidence. (Or is the line in the movie just "my main man?" If so, yeah, this is bogus.) If it were to be mentioned, it would be better here than on the STOA page, unless we make a separate page for the manual and the auction thereof (which would be silly).
Antisexy 20:43, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
I'd be unhappy with the first fact, because it's basically speculation. Yes, some people see the connection when they play the game, and I can definitely see this being true. But we don't know if that was the actual intention of TBC, so it's a bit too bold to claim that it is. What we usually do is note this on the talk page, as we've now done. As for the second fact, there is currently only one Google result for the phrase in question [3]. I haven't seen the movie myself, but it doesn't seem to be a quote from anywhere. Loafing 21:11, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
..groan.. It's always gotta be "actual intentions," does it? Actually, I didn't really notice where this (the one about the game being hard to understand) was originally placed. It is a bit to speculative for the summary, but wouldn't be okay under Remarks??--Antisexy 21:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
If we say "The game recreates..." or anything of the like, wouldn't you think that we strongly imply that this was intentional? Loafing 21:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but confusion is such an obvious element in this game, how can not be intentional? Are we only debating whether or not the foreign language was an intended to add to the confusion? It seems very likely to me.--Antisexy 21:36, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Just to get the "mobile is the future, my main man" bit out of the way, as best as I can tell, the entire phrase is a TBC original, and it only shares "my main main" with the movie. A connection isn't impossible, but it's a stretch. We seem to be in agreement on that. Regarding the other part, we're just talking about a description at the top, not so much a fun fact. We've got a bit of latitude to say what we want. Part of the humor of the game is that you have to figure out what the crap is going on, which I believe is completely intentional, and we should comment on it if it can be worded concisely. — It's dot com 21:43, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
So it's all down to the wording, is that it? How about "The Russian text in the game is intended to confuse the player, but the game itself is played almost entirely through pictures." (eh, not too good). If we can word it efficiently, I think we should also have the reader refer to the Translations section. — SamSF%20sig.jpgFisher (Come in, Lambert.) 21:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Hmm... Well, I went up to read the opening summary as it is now to see how we might be able to fit all that in, but now that I look at it, the direct quote from Videlectrix does a pretty good job at summing up confusion and foreign language/bad translation. So then... I guess it's fine as is. I still think the original edit "The game recreates the trial-and-error aspects and confusion of playing games in another language" would look nice and pretty in remarks, but I guess I'm the only one.--Antisexy 22:04, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Meh, it seems to obvious for a full-fledged remark. — It's dot com 22:20, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I am the one who reverted the "my main man" fact and i stand by it. To add to what loafing said, the phrase "my main man" has over 224,000 google hits, hence showing it to be a common phrase and not based on that movie. Furthermore, to Nsayer and whoever else, I judge edits based on content and content alone. There have been many times when I've reverted even the more experienced users. So please stop getting all bent out of shape about your edits not getting in, and please continue to edit, and if the content is deemed good by the community, I guarantee you it will stay. Nothing to get discouraged about. — Defender1031*Talk 22:36, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Personal tools