Talk:Star Wars Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleStar Wars Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast was one of the Sports and recreation good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
July 6, 2007Good article nomineeListed
August 4, 2007WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
August 14, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 22, 2007Good article reassessmentKept
August 31, 2009Good topic candidatePromoted
February 12, 2011Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article


I'm just wondering but aren't there two plot inconsistencies between JK and JK II, which are the name of Katarn's ship (Moldy Crow to Ravens' Claw) and lightsaber colour (green to blue)? Although I never played JK, I guess this could be explained in the article, especially the lightsaber color change. wS 04:32, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Moldy Crow was destroyed in JK and this is mentioned in the aticle Kyle Katarn. Also in that game, Kyle lost his lightsaber (I don't remember its colour) and got Yun's (which if not mistaken, it was orange). I think in MotS, Kyle still has Yun's lightsabre. I don't know if this is explained somewhere anyhow, but I guess Kyle made a new one, since a jedi must construct his own to finish his training.
Ah, great. Thanks for explaining me that. wS 20:02, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Weirdy 07:00, 27 March 2006 (UTC) From Weirdy[reply]

I haven't played Jedi Knight Academy too, but in Outcast, Kyle Katarn must find his saber in Yavin Temple.

Multiplayer History[edit]

This page needs something detailing the interesting multiplayer history of this game. It would need to be both unbiased and holistic. Including statistics on how many online players were engaged in it over the span of four years that it's been out. It would also need to detail each gametype and versions.

-- I did the most I could here with my knowledge, anyone can feel free to add history usage statistics or prominent server names and events - but I wasn't sure it'd add to the "timeless" nature of the article. (3/9/22)

Add on Glitches and Section for Multiplayer in different versions?[edit]

AS the topic suggests, there is alot more on this game that can be expanded. Currently, in its most ebbed form, it lacks valid information pertaining to the facts. I propose adding a section for Multiplayer, Different Versions and Various glitches by patch--including release dates for patches.


This section is ALL OR, first person, and speculative. I'm thinking about removing it - dont see any way to clean it up. Wooty 05:46, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-- I have no idea what OR means, the section is only first person at the end when I mention how to play the original version after a patch, and its hardly speculative, sounds more to me like you never played the game or that you didn't really read the section. Now if you are trying to say that you don't believe me then fine. I suppose it can be argued that the information is opinionated in places but there are some good facts in it and cleaning it up is not impossible, you are just being lazy. Thanks for completely removing my effort to try and contribute information about this game, I know wikipedia allows such things to happen but I expected more. Oh well.

It's all original research, and I have played JK2 and JK3 for a couple of years. This is an encyclopedia, not an essay on how you felt about the game's decline. Wooty 18:50, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-- Go to the Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight wikipedia entry and tell me the sections about the mods and online play are any different. If your gonna erase all my entries then go ahead and erase that guy's entries too.

GCN info[edit]

Is the number of memory blocks the game takes up on Gamecube really relevant in any way? If no one complains here, I will remove it. Timbatron 03:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the Gamecube info is unimportant and should be removed unless the technical section can be extended. Workster

Done Timbatron 04:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed links from the External Links section[edit]

Removed links to and from the External Links section. Just squatters there now. 20:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking About Adding PC Box Instead of Xbox Box[edit]

Since JO came out A LONG TIME AGO for the PC, I Think it's only fair that we put up the original box.

Re-written the plot summary[edit]

I looked at this article yesterday for the first time in a few months. I noticed that many of the sections had been taken out, which I did not have a problem with as they were largely unencyclopedic (a list of cameos, weapons, planets visited etc hardly seems appropriate for an encyclopedia).

So virtually the only thing which this page consists of is the plot section, which goes into way too much detail (see WP:PLOT). So much so that I decided to take it upon myself to write a condensed version of the plot. The new plot summary is six short-to-average-lengthed paragraphs, which is much more preferable than ten or so long paragraphs we currently have.

Hopefully I'll be spending more time working on other essential areas of the article that should be there (primarily gameplay, development, critical reception). I want to get this to at least B-class, but preferably GA-class. UnaLaguna 20:20, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We've got a long way to go. We have to cover reception, development, and references to these along with gameplay mechanics.—Theodorel 09:39, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I'm a good way through writing a gameplay section. You can view it in its current stage at User:UnaLaguna/Sandbox (which also has some useful links ). Currently I think all it needs is a bit about the community's interpretation of the multiplayer side of the game (bowing, master/padawan clan setup). And yes, I can source it. UnaLaguna 06:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done, as far as I can tell. I may have missed something, and if so feel free to add it, but remember to source what you say as the Gameplay section is currently fully-sourced. UnaLaguna 19:53, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article has come a long way in the past week. Now all that remains to be done is re-write the lead, review the external links and some minor fiddling with the infobox. We should be getting pretty close to GA by now. UnaLaguna 06:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re-vamping nearly done![edit]

Gameplay, Plot, Development, Critical Reception and References are all sorted out now. Effectively three things remain:

  1. Sorting infobox information - I think it would be more useful to provide the release dates for the individual platforms instead of the release dates solely for the PC version. This should take little time. Done
  2. The current lead section is poor. It's currently in the works. I'll admit I find lead sections the hardest part of an article (probably why I left it to the end), but I'll give it my best shot. Done
  3. We have space for another image or two, so should probably use it. I'm planning on taking a screenshot in multiplayer, and possibly one from the opening cutscene. Done

Then we have assessment, and hopefully a trip to the GA-making end of Wikipedia (or beyond!?).

I've re-done the external links section; the official website and one of the forums links produced a 404. I couldn't find a suitable alternative for an "official page" from LucasArts (Raven do have one, but it's not good enough to be worthy of external link section-ness in my opinion). I got rid of the Massassi link, too, since it has more of a focus on the previous game in the Jedi Knight series. I kept the link as from my experience it's the biggest file site for JKII around, and actually reviews the files it puts up there. UnaLaguna 08:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a picture of Kyle himself would work in the plot section? --FireV 00:02, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm thinking of uploading a screenshot from the opening cutscene, with Kyle and Jan in the cockpit. I'd also like to try and fit an image from multiplayer in there somewhere. UnaLaguna 06:17, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Try to get a shot where the camera angle shows Kyle & Jan head-on, because portraits usually make better pictures. --FireV 06:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I took your advice for the Kyle/Jan picture, and also added a screenshot from the multiplayer game. Now it's time for ASSESSMENT!!! Dun dun dunnnn. UnaLaguna 12:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VG Assessment[edit]

This is in regards to the request at the VG Assessment page. I'm rating this article as B-class, Low-importance. Here are a few tips to improve it!

So, you're doing a great job with this, definitely. What jumps out at me immediately is that there are no references for the plot section (generally the hardest to find). Other than that, though, it's looking great, I'd recommend finding some references for that section, and sending it on to GAC! --PresN 14:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. Now I'm off to GAC Land... UnaLaguna 06:54, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nomination on hold[edit]

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of July 6, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Pass Great work.
2. Factually accurate?: Fail References 7 and 38 do nor lead to the articles they were sourcing. Also, references 48 & 1 lead to the same page, as do References 2 & 44. These need to be combined into one reference each.
3. Broad in coverage?: Pass Great work. I do suggest, however, that you include a "Character" section in the future.
4. Neutral point of view?: Pass Great work
5. Article stability? Pass
6. Images?: Pass All have copyrights and rationale.

Overall, great work on this article. I love how you source within the document as often as you can. However, some the references need to be fixed before I can promote it (See above comments) This should not be too hard to fix, so when you do plesae notify me on my talk page so I can promote it. Thanks! :)

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. — Z1720 07:05, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Refs 1 and 48 have been merged, as have 2 and 44. I clarified source 38, as what it shows (the number of JKII mods in each category on the FileFront site) verifies the claim made in the article, and I assume it's a reliable source (it shows there are hundreds of sources... which there are). I replaced source 7 (which showed the scores for Xbox, GameCube and PC versions of the game) with references already in the article which show the same aggregate scores. UnaLaguna 18:20, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I hereby grant this article GA status, as the references have been fixed. Great work! Just one tip: if you continue working on this article to get it to FA status, I would suggest adding a character section. (See Final Fantasy 7) Good luck in the future and I can't wait to see improvements on the article Z1720 19:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the swift response and promotion to GA! Whooo! And I think I will try to get the article to FA: thanks for the advice. UnaLaguna 19:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Consider that character section added! I guess I should stick this article up for Peer Review to get ideas to get it to FA. UnaLaguna 21:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The final steps[edit]

I can't think of anything much to add now that I've done a characters/setting section. I know I need to re-work the wikilinks as some in the story section are now redundant. I'm also considering adding a picture of Desann. I'll probably stick it up for peer review after that to see what can be done. UnaLaguna

Re-worked the wikilinks in the plot section and added the Desann picture conveniently already uploaded. Time for a Peer Review, methinks. UnaLaguna 20:51, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FAC as of yesterday. Nobody's posted any comments/supports/opposes - I guess no news is good news for now. I've noticed that since the nomination a number of people have cleaned up minor points in the article which I hadn't noticed. If you're one such person and are reading this... thank you. UnaLaguna

GA Pass[edit]

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, T Rex | talk 19:07, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good to know. Thanks. Una LagunaTalk 20:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External Links[edit]

External links have been updated. From time to time this area is tampered with, valid and relevant links are deleted while clan websites and online stores (Moby Games) are put in place. I just took the time to update this area, your thoughts are appreciated but please discuss before changing... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kfedup (talkcontribs) 02:22, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Codes and Cheats[edit]

I think there should be a list of sorts or at least mention of Jedi Outcast's large selection of codes. I can't think of another game with more options in that area. Quietmartialartist 22:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The majority of the codes used in JKII apply to all games using the Quake III engine. What makes these codes exclusive to this game notable? Are there any reliable sources which discuss the codes? Una LagunaTalk 07:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you "spawn" over three dozen different non-playable characters and near a dozen vehicles in any of the other Quake III games? (Or another Star Wars game, for that matter) Is there a code for full "force" or all force powers at their maximum level on Unreal Tournament 2004, etc.? An in-game code (not a mod) to change your melee weapon(s) (color and style)? A code that allows you to take control of enemies and change their saber(s)? I may go on and on...

If I'm not mistaken, most of those are Star Wars specific and would not be in a different game type.

As for a reliable source I deem the players can sufficiently attest to them effective. If validity is an issue, I could always upload about 200 screen shots detailing each cheat if you require that... Quietmartialartist (talk) 01:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spawn NPCs in another game? Yes, yes you can. You still haven't responded to my point about how cheats satisfy the notability criteria and where you'd find reliable sources. Submitting your own screenshots would be considered original research, and I doubt the accounts of random people who've played the game would be deemed as reliable. Neither you nor I would be considered as reliable, so I doubt anyone other person who knew a few cheats would be. Also, Wikipedia is neither a game guide nor an indiscriminate list of information. Una LagunaTalk 07:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please take care, I'm taking an immediate dislike to you. Personally, I really don't care if this addition is made. I just thought I'd suggest a way to improve the article and instead of assuming good faith, you quote half a dozen policies that I'm already aware of.

Of course you can spawn those same NPCs in Jedi Academy. The list I mentioned would include a reference to you being able to use all of those cheats in Jedi Academy considering JKA is almost nothing more than an expansion to JKII. As for notability, Quote:

The common theme in the notability guidelines is the requirement for verifiable objective evidence to support a claim of notability. Substantial coverage in reliable sources constitutes such objective evidence, as do published peer recognition and the other factors listed in the subject specific guidelines.

A picture should be sufficient validity. [1] Sure, I could have edited the picture, but why would I want to? This isn't a historical event or anything substantially important. All it takes to disprove a picture is a copy of JKII and the very basic knowledge required to bring up the console.

Dozens of websites and even more players can attest to the fact that these codes work.

In order to achieve the above: Hit ~ + shift, enter "helpusobi 1", "setforceall 4", "npc spawn shadowtrooper", then aim at the npc and hit the key for "mind trick", once you've taken control of the npc enter "sabercolor blue" and you now have a blue saber wielding shadowtrooper.

I asked for "a list or at least mention" of the large number of codes this game attains, perhaps the list, but a short mentioning of it would not be making this page a guide to the game(s). Quietmartialartist (talk) 18:35, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I've said, simply providing a screenshot as evidence is still original research. Wikipedia is only interested in information from reliable sources. I'm sure dozens of websites and even more players can attest to the fact that these codes work. Hey, I've been playing Jedi Outcast for three years myself and know enough codes to acknowledge you're not lying. But being able to say that cheats exist goes for pretty much every other game there is; ergo, I'd hardly deem it as notable.
A list, or even just one or two examples of how to input the codes, would cross the boundary between encyclopedic and game guide material. If you can provide a reliable source which discusses the codes and how they're different and notable from most other games (so not just a list of them/how-to guide) then we may be able to mention information regarding the codes. However, after making a couple of Google searches and not finding anything useful on the first page, my hopes are not high. Una LagunaTalk 19:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not suggesting that we supply "examples of how to input the codes", just that this game, and it's sequel, have nearly, or more, than 80 valid codes (including NPC spawning). Of course lots of games have codes, I am not disputing that. I am unaware of a game with that many codes. The average I've found is around 20, maybe.

May I ask where above I personally "attacked" you? Quietmartialartist (talk) 15:40, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The first paragraph was directed at me rather than improving the article's quality.
Found a reliable source yet? Una LagunaTalk 21:30, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Improving an article is a team effort and I'm finding your methods irritating. I wasn't attacking you. Perhaps you should re-read that policy.

You still haven't responded to some of my statements, like for example the fact that this game has over 80 valid codes. Does that not deserve mention? Do you know of a game with more codes than that? Quietmartialartist (talk) 16:07, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I currently don't have much time for research or big-time edits. Suggesting to others to do x and y is a lot quicker than doing them myself (and usually gives better results!). If we find a reliable source which mentions the cheats then yes, we can mention the unusually large number of codes. But currently, I think the major obstacle is finding such a source to use. If Google can't show up any results, then I bet there's a review somewhere which will mention the cheats. Una LagunaTalk 21:07, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many, MANY games feature a console that can extensively exploit a game to some extent. It would not be appropriate to add console commands to this article, even by stating that 'x game' features an 'unusually high number' of useful commands. See, the Source Engine provides LOADS of commands such as ncp_spawn and various other things. However, none of these are listed in the article. -- (talk) 05:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Many, MANY games feature a console that can extensively exploit a game to some extent."

Like? And if there is, can you cite a credible source like UnaLaguna suggested?

I don't know, something about how you phrased that brought to mind the other 100+ codes that can be entered into the console to, for example; remove smoke trails from rockets, and remove/add certain visual effects like the force "bubble" that comes up when you either push or pull with the force. Quietmartialartist (talk) 19:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ending revealed in the article[edit]

Does anyone else find this unethical? I suggest we delete it. Quietmartialartist (talk) 17:44, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SPOIL. --FireV (talk) 02:11, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
FireV's link pretty much covers it. If you're reading a plot syopsis section, wouldn't you expect all major plot details? Admittedly the current heading perhaps doesn't make that very clear - I'll change it from "Story" to "Synopsis". Una LagunaTalk 09:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well should there not be a "Spoiler" Warning? Little kids looking this up probably don't even know what Synopsis means. Quietmartialartist (talk) 14:48, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you're not happy with "Synopsis" we can change it to "Summary", but policy still applies. Una LagunaTalk 19:55, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirected from 'reborns'?[edit]

Surprised to find myself directed to this page when I searched 'reborns', seems somewhat inconsequential. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reborn are some of the primary villains within the game. As far as I can discern, it originally had its own article at "Reborns"; the article was then moved to a more appropriate article name. The subject didn't have enough information to justify its own article, so was replaced with a redirect to here. Una LagunaTalk 17:13, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links (again)[edit]

Again the external links section was tampered with. The person who did it didn't even bother to put a note in the talk section (of course) so I've restored it to it's original format. -- (talk) 00:15, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article reassessment[edit]

I'm listing this under GAR for the following reasons:

  • The prose has an extensive amount of 1-2 line paragraphs.
  • Several large portions of gameplay are unsourced.
  • The four in-game images need updates to fair-use rationales, and three of them are too high resolution. Additionally, four images seems a bit much, whereas one gameplay image and one development image may be more appropriate. I would strongly recommend replacing all four gameplay images with something that more accurately shows gampelay. The first image sortof does, but it's an early screenshot and so it paints the game in a dull light since it has a bland background.
  • The Reception section could use work, fixing thins such as "IGN said" - the publication didn't say it, the reviewer did.
  • All of the cites are missing the publication date, having only accessdates. Additionally it might be best to replace some of the work= with publisher= on non-magazine references.
  • The plot could be trimmed (775 words) but that's not so much a GAR issue as it's close to our non-official standard of 700 from WP:FILMPLOT. That being said it's not a long game, so it could easily be trimmed.
  • The lead has citations. While again not a total deal breaker all content in the lead should be in the body, and if it's in the body, it's not necessary to cite it in the lead per WP:LEADCITE.

--Teancum (talk) 21:43, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have no intention of defending the article, but I don't think the Plot section's physical length is a problem. I've never seen WP:FILMPLOT cited in all my years with WPVG, and, in general, I disagree with word limits being placed on article sections. If the content is over-long, sure, but putting restrictions on word count goes against the concepts on which Wikipedia was built. Admittedly, the article looks to deserve delisting, but its plot length is not a legitimate concern. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:03, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I re-wrote this article and brought it to GA three and a half years ago, when the GA standards were much more lax than they are now. I haven't look at the article in months (if not years), but it seems the Gameplay section (which was always the weakest part of the article) has changed quite a bit. Originally, the Gameplay section was almost entirely cited from the game's manual. The plot synopsis could probably be trimmed a bit, and the two images from that section removed. The Reception section is generally poorly-worded, and could probably do with a re-write. The Development section looks acceptable to me.
I don't have much time for Wikipedia these days, so I can't commit to resolve all the issues (which are mostly fairly minor, just large in quantity). It would be a shame to see the article demoted, and it was considered a strong article at the time of its promotion, but if the article isn't improved then I agree it definitely doesn't meet the current GA standards. Una LagunaTalk 21:58, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Its been over a week and since the article hasn't been edited since Feb. 5th and there's still problems in the article, I am now delisting the article. GamerPro64 (talk) 18:31, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great interview with developers[edit]