Talk: Star Wars Galaxies/Archive1

Back to page |
< Talk:Star Wars Galaxies

This page is an archive of the discussion of an article. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's current talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.

Edit History copied from Wikipedia

  1. (cur) (last) 13:25, 18 May 2005 67.10.48.163 (→The Jedi in Star Wars Galaxies)
  2. (cur) (last) 13:24, 18 May 2005 67.10.48.163 (→The Jedi in Star Wars Galaxies)
  3. (cur) (last) 02:46, 10 May 2005 Hadal m (Reverted edits by 216.8.34.129 to last version by Rdsmith4)
  4. (cur) (last) 02:44, 10 May 2005 216.8.34.129 (→The Jedi in Star Wars Galaxies)
  5. (cur) (last) 02:43, 10 May 2005 216.8.34.129 (→Expansions)
  6. (cur) (last) 02:43, 10 May 2005 Rdsmith4 m (Reverted edits by 216.8.34.129 to last version by Jrdioko)
  7. (cur) (last) 02:43, 10 May 2005 216.8.34.129 (→Development and release)
  8. (cur) (last) 02:40, 10 May 2005 216.8.34.129 (→Combat Upgrade)
  9. (cur) (last) 18:38, 9 May 2005 Jrdioko m (Reverted edits by 168.169.199.61 to last version by 83.235.110.205)
  10. (cur) (last) 18:35, 9 May 2005 168.169.199.61 (→Combat Upgrade)
  11. (cur) (last) 11:40, 9 May 2005 83.235.110.205 (→Fan sites)
  12. (cur) (last) 12:31, 3 May 2005 Glowimperial m (→Development and release - minor tense correction)
  13. (cur) (last) 06:49, 1 May 2005 Husnock m (→Combat Upgrade - spelling)
  14. (cur) (last) 06:49, 1 May 2005 Husnock (→The Jedi in Star Wars Galaxies - put back in deleted paragraph and expanded with CU info)
  15. (cur) (last) 06:45, 1 May 2005 Husnock (→Expansions - Combat upgrade)
  16. (cur) (last) 18:03, 27 Apr 2005 Hadal m (Reverted edits by 216.120.8.254 to last version by TheObtuseAngleOfDoom)
  17. (cur) (last) 17:58, 27 Apr 2005 216.120.8.254 (→The Jedi in Star Wars Galaxies)
  18. (cur) (last) 16:24, 27 Apr 2005 TheObtuseAngleOfDoom (rv)
  19. (cur) (last) 01:01, 27 Apr 2005 66.75.133.30 (→The Jedi in Star Wars Galaxies)
  20. (cur) (last) 01:57, 26 Apr 2005 152.228.130.154 (→External links)
  21. (cur) (last) 01:55, 26 Apr 2005 152.228.130.154 (→The Jedi in Star Wars Galaxies)
  22. (cur) (last) 01:38, 26 Apr 2005 66.75.133.30 (→The Jedi in Star Wars Galaxies)
  23. (cur) (last) 23:09, 25 Apr 2005 216.120.8.254 (→The Jedi in Star Wars Galaxies)
  24. (cur) (last) 16:52, 24 Apr 2005 Husnock (→The Jedi in Star Wars Galaxies - link fix)
  25. (cur) (last) 16:51, 24 Apr 2005 Husnock (→The Jedi in Star Wars Galaxies - slight expansion and grammer)
  26. (cur) (last) 16:32, 24 Apr 2005 Husnock (wrote new Jedi section)
  27. (cur) (last) 22:17, 17 Apr 2005 K1Bond007 (update infobox, structure and organization, grammatical changes etc.)
  28. (cur) (last) 05:34, 17 Apr 2005 K1Bond007 m (→Rage of the Wookiees - two e)
  29. (cur) (last) 21:08, 16 Apr 2005 83.132.60.25 (→Fan sites)
  30. (cur) (last) 19:45, 16 Apr 2005 83.132.60.25 (→Rage of the Wookiees)
  31. (cur) (last) 21:09, 14 Mar 2005 Mrwojo (formatting, wording, wikification)
  32. (cur) (last) 20:56, 14 Mar 2005 Mrwojo (→Rage of the Wookiees - some clarifying (recently -> March 2005, movie), formatting)
  33. (cur) (last) 20:23, 14 Mar 2005 216.220.37.73 (Title is actually "Star Wars Galaxies: Episode III Rage of the Wookies".)
  34. (cur) (last) 18:39, 12 Mar 2005 65.80.168.75
  35. (cur) (last) 23:45, 20 Feb 2005 Mrwojo (→External links - remove commercial link)
  36. (cur) (last) 21:56, 20 Feb 2005 24.126.211.233 (→Fan sites)
  37. (cur) (last) 16:14, 11 Feb 2005 Steveng
  38. (cur) (last) 05:22, 8 Feb 2005 Cbarbry m
  39. (cur) (last) 16:34, 7 Feb 2005 Steveng
  40. (cur) (last) 16:32, 7 Feb 2005 Steveng
  41. (cur) (last) 22:30, 6 Feb 2005 205.188.116.11
  42. (cur) (last) 05:27, 17 Jan 2005 Ssd m (→Fan sites - rm Category:Proprietary games)
  43. (cur) (last) 05:19, 27 Dec 2004 Ellmist (Category:Proprietary games)
  44. (cur) (last) 15:44, 16 Dec 2004 207.103.166.34
  45. (cur) (last) 15:55, 2 Dec 2004 Texture (→External links - rm swg wiki - already listed)
  46. (cur) (last) 15:52, 2 Dec 2004 Texture (→External links - * Star Wars Galaxies Wiki
  47. (cur) (last) 14:28, 25 Nov 2004 Mrwojo (→Fan sites - formatting)
  48. (cur) (last) 10:14, 25 Nov 2004 195.27.92.98 (→Fan sites)
  49. (cur) (last) 10:14, 25 Nov 2004 195.27.92.98 (→Fan sites)
  50. (cur) (last) 10:14, 25 Nov 2004 195.27.92.98 (→Fan sites)
  51. * (cur) (last) 10:13, 25 Nov 2004 195.27.92.98 (→Fan sites)
  52. * (cur) (last) 10:10, 25 Nov 2004 195.27.92.98 (→External links)
  53. * (cur) (last) 18:14, 24 Nov 2004 145.53.217.18
  54. * (cur) (last) 08:15, 20 Nov 2004 69.198.110.169
  55. * (cur) (last) 22:24, 13 Nov 2004 Mrwojo (→Jump to Lightspeed - removing some future tense)
  56. * (cur) (last) 21:37, 13 Nov 2004 K1Bond007
  57. * (cur) (last) 20:03, 6 Nov 2004 Mrwojo m (→Jump to Lightspeed)
  58. * (cur) (last) 17:57, 6 Nov 2004 61.16.210.245 (→Jump to Lightspeed)
  59. * (cur) (last) 11:43, 2 Nov 2004 Liftarn m (Interwiki)
  60. * (cur) (last) 20:39, 1 Nov 2004 Thunderbrand (made box art smaller)
  61. * (cur) (last) 23:56, 29 Oct 2004 Paranoid (→External links - added a link to a treatise on balance issues)
  62. * (cur) (last) 16:06, 29 Oct 2004 Barneyboo (→Jump to Lightspeed)
  63. * (cur) (last) 23:57, 24 Oct 2004 Kevin Mulligan m (Removed white space)
  64. * (cur) (last) 14:12, 22 Oct 2004 Kevin Mulligan (Added table of information)
  65. * (cur) (last) 15:02, 20 Oct 2004 Mrwojo (cleanup ext. links; removed "forum posts" line; moved (& cited) reviews bit)
  66. * (cur) (last) 08:28, 15 Oct 2004 67.71.16.158
  67. * (cur) (last) 16:00, 23 Sep 2004 Mrwojo (reword Jump to Lightspeed real-time elements)
  68. * (cur) (last) 03:17, 23 Sep 2004 Bob535 m
  69. * (cur) (last) 19:30, 21 Aug 2004 67.71.16.218 (External link)
  70. * (cur) (last) 10:25, 16 Aug 2004 RhettSarlin
  71. * (cur) (last) 18:05, 9 Aug 2004 Barneyboo m
  72. * (cur) (last) 23:57, 4 Aug 2004 IlyaHaykinson m (→External links - Category:Star Wars computer games)
  73. * (cur) (last) 23:46, 31 Jul 2004 67.171.146.74 (where are the links, young Padawan?)
  74. * (cur) (last) 23:06, 31 Jul 2004 IlyaHaykinson m (more precise releae date for JTL)
  75. * (cur) (last) 18:27, 16 Jul 2004 Patrick Corcoran m (Add per month to usage fee)
  76. * (cur) (last) 21:08, 13 Jun 2004 24.185.144.29 (Added to MMORPG Category)
  77. * (cur) (last) 22:01, 10 Jun 2004 68.54.115.173
  78. * (cur) (last) 12:43, 14 May 2004 Dominick (fixed link, wrong address)
  79. * (cur) (last) 23:54, 13 May 2004 Kazuki m (just adding another link to the list, as i believe it to be a useful site for information for the game)
  80. * (cur) (last) 22:41, 21 Apr 2004 Mrwojo (+info on the Jump to Lightspeed expansion)
  81. * (cur) (last) 22:55, 13 Apr 2004 212.185.214.171
  82. * (cur) (last) 15:56, 20 Jan 2004 Dominick (deleted sentence about ebaying, Ebaying in SWG is cheating)
  83. * (cur) (last) 22:54, 26 Dec 2003 Goodralph (killed credit store link. seemed like an ad)
  84. * (cur) (last) 08:37, 24 Dec 2003 Phil Boswell m (fixing link)
  85. * (cur) (last) 06:27, 24 Dec 2003 64.39.191.67
  86. * (cur) (last) 09:27, 20 Dec 2003 64.39.191.120
  87. * (cur) (last) 05:05, 15 Dec 2003 64.39.191.18
  88. * (cur) (last) 01:50, 15 Dec 2003 Mrwojo m (fix Lineage wikilink)
  89. * (cur) (last) 14:53, 14 Dec 2003 Goodralph
  90. * (cur) (last) 13:47, 14 Dec 2003 Goodralph m
  91. * (cur) (last) 19:21, 26 Nov 2003 Mrwojo (just PC (for now?); +a bit of history, pre- and post-release; -stub msg.)
  92. * (cur) (last) 08:44, 3 Oct 2003 Quoth

Sorry about the mess: Rage of the Wookiees pages

I thought that I'd start new pages for each the expansions, just like Mysteries of the Sith has its own page seperate from Jedi Knight: Dark Forces II. I wanted Rage of the Wookiees and Star Wars Galaxies: Rage of the Wookiees both to redirect to a new page called Star Wars Galaxies: Episode III Rage of the Wookiees. After my attempts, the results were a bit of a mess.

As it is now, Rage of the Wookiees redirects to Star Wars Galaxies: Rage of the Wookiees, and Star Wars Galaxies: Episode III Rage of the Wookiees redirects to the main Star Wars Galaxies page.

Very sorry about that :-( I don't know how to fix it, i think an admin needs to intervene. Sorry :-( --Azizlight 00:59, 2 Aug 2005 (UTC)

  • I thought Star Wars Galaxies: Rage of the Wookiees was the correct name? Anyway, it wasn't too bad a mess. I made "Star Wars Galaxies: Episode III Rage of the Wookiees" into a redirect to "Star Wars Galaxies: Rage of the Wookiees" until the name is clarified. --Imp 01:04, 2 Aug 2005 (UTC)
    • Yeah most people call it Star Wars Galaxies: Rage of the Wookiees, but i checked the official Star Wars Galaxies site, and they always call it Star Wars Galaxies: Episode III Rage of the Wookiees. --Azizlight 01:17, 2 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Old vehicles in SW:G

This is just a small rant, but still: claiming that old vehicles/ships being used many years after they´ve stopped being produced is "inconsistent with continuity", is a bit silly IMO. It´s like complaining about the old VW Beetle being driven years after production stopped (or any other carmodel, really). I agree about most things that don´t make sense in the game, but this one thing shouldn´t really be an issue. What is an issue however, is the possible proliferation of these models, especially the Firespray-class (which was limited production, only). It´s like the spread of Jedi on all the planets, so I heartily agree it´s silly. Unfortunately, that´s game mechanics for you.=/ VT-16 12:10, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)

  • I agree with VT-16 on old vehicles, for what it's worth.
  • Me too, but I can understand for the ones which have stopped production but not the ones which havent been built yet. That is an inconsistensy. Star Destroyer 2500 15:40, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Isn't the A-wing and B-wing in this? I'm not sure when they were first made, but that might be an inconsistency. This game does take place some months after Yavin, though. And the A-wing already had a similar-looking predecessor before this timeframe (the R-22 Spearhead). VT-16 09:09, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Well, what you have to realize is that the extended universe and the games will never fit wholy with the movies and books. It's like a big puzzle that you find in the attic that has some pieces missing, but those are replaced by other pieces that don't quite fit, but still resemble the overall puzzle. It's a little messed up, but what isn't? Lord vader1414 22:17, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Help

"We have detected a client crash. If you have not recently done so, we recommend that you click "Full Scan" from the LaunchPad to check the integrity of the game's files." what does that mean and how do I fix it

  • basically, your game has crashed, or there is a virus. go to your launch pad and click "full scan" like it told you to. Lord vader1414 22:24, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Internet Play

Do you have to play this game on the internet, or can you play it without it? --Dil 04:34, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • You need the internet. Probably more for this than for any other Star Wars game. -LtNOWIS 05:07, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)
  • Are you one hundred per cent sure about that? Why can't you play off line exactly?-Lord vader1414
  • >< Jondon Cenobi 06:56, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Because it's an MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game) Multiplayer and Online being the key words there..

Article name

I think this is important, as new appearance links are often made with the current article name in mind to avoid redirects. Last name move was from Star Wars Galaxies: An Empire Divided to Star Wars: Galaxies, probably considering that An Empire Divided is title only for the first release. Though, Star Wars: Galaxies is not used by Lucasarts or SOE, willing to be understood as "the multiple galaxies of Star Wars". Also, that same exact title is not used inside the article. So I would say that the title should be moved to Star Wars Galaxies or reverted to Star Wars Galaxies: An Empire Divided, this last is not to be considered an independant publish at same level than JtL, RoW and TOW, is the game base and the others can't be played without it, while the opposite is possible. More oppinions? --Thinortolan 12:57, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)

  • I think it's a good idea to reroute everything to Star Wars Galaxies. If they all tie in, why not do it? Lord vader1414 22:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Continuity error?

Is it an error for Darth Vader to be on Naboo, given that Qui Gon Jinn told Obi-Wan that Vader will not go to Tatooine due to bad memories that would dredge up the Anakin within? I would figure Naboo would be just as bad. But then again, Vader seems to have no problem with Coruscant, where the twins were supposedly conceived, so perhaps it's just Tatooine.

  • The twins were conceived on Polis massa... and he shows up in tatooine too in the game
  • Uhh they were BORN on polis massa, not conceived there. The process of conception is quite different than the process of birth.
  • Really, annon #2, did you never learn about the birds and the bees from your parents? Come on man. Padme lived on Coruscant during the Clone Wars, not on Polis Massa. She never even visited the asteroid until her labor with Luke and Leia. -Lord vader1414 20:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC)]

Non-corporeal figure

"Many quests will also revolve around the return of a non-corporeal figure from Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic."

Now that the specified November 1 deadline has passed, does anyone know who this quote refers to? Lieutenant Gerard 01:29, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

  • I think this refers to HK-47. JDspeeder1 00:58, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Yeah it's deffinately HK-47 on Mustafar, I am going to change it because there is no disputing it is him and his missions are done out of Mensix, you talk to one of the Mustafarians on the bottom floor of the building and the last mission is to kill HK-47. Swerto 15:13, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Continuity

I see no reason why obi-wans spirit cannot be on mustafar and it says mandalorian armor is rare; so why would that stp you from crafting and using it? If no one responds to this in 2 days I am changing it. Star Destroyer 2500 22:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Obi-wan didn't die until Episode 4, so his spirit was never on Mustafar, it was on Dagobah with Yoda most of the time. As for the Mandalorian armor, only the Mandalore could craft it. For example, no non-Jedi ever BUILT a lightsaber. They may have used one, but never did they craft it, and if they did, it wouldn't have the Jedi seal of aprooval, hence, it would meerly be a copy. [[[User:Lord vader1414|Lord vader1414]] 20:18, 24 May 2006 (UTC)]
  • not sure why he'd do that, but if you realy want to know, vist the Obi-wan archive to find out about it. I know that other than his battle with Anakin in RotS, he was never on Mustafar. Lord vader1414 00:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Obi-Wan was never on Dagobah, either, yet his spirit appeared there in Episodes V and VI. Nothing stopping him from revisiting Mustafar as a spirit. LtPowers 14:52, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Star Wars Galaxies takes place between ep IV and V, and like LtPowers nothing would really stop him.

Is Galaxies Canon?

Is star wars galaxies canon or fanon because mi friend sed dat it was canon but i wasnt sure so im askin all wookiepedians out there 2 giv me an answerJedi Exile 21:10, 25 May 2006

  • It is, but it isnt. in other words, parts of it are completly canon while others aren't. Hope it helps. :) Lord vader1414 22:09, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
    • I think Leland Chee said it was as canon as any other game, which means it's canon. Things like the N-K Necrosis have been featured in other sources. However, player characters and their actions are not canon. Actually, checking back with the article, the quote is already there. -LtNOWIS 22:22, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
  • When he says that it's as canon as any other game, that means it has some inconsistenceies (sp?) with it, as do most Star Wars games. very few fit perfectly with the movies. Lord vader1414 00:56, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
  • I started playing a few months after release, and being throughly familiar with the Star Wars EU timeline I can say without question the SWG is definitely NOT cannon. there may be cannonical elements within the game, mentioning of persons, places, or things, but the game itself from the "clothing tapes" to the "umpteen million jedi running around" to the " planets are only 15x15 km in size" is anything but cannonical.68.97.228.190 16:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The game has gone into the toilet. Wikipedia mentions that. Why doesn't Wookieepedia?

To be more accurate, Wikipedia mentions that a lot of players became dissatisfied with the game and canceled their accounts. Wikipedia also lists the reasons for their dissatisfaction:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_Galaxies#Controversy

Now, I would say that these things are worth noting here as well. Wouldn't you?--HanShotFirst 05:30, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Probably, yeah. -LtNOWIS 05:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I won't be the one to post them, though, since the admins seem intent on deleting every other contribution I make and I'd rather not put a lot of work into something only to see it removed by some holier-than-thou type.--HanShotFirst 16:24, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

What I'd like to see in the next expansion

For the next expansion, it just has to be Imperial Center as the new planet, hasn't it? - Kribe

  • I am imagining the big-city lag of Coronet on a planetary scale, and it ain't pretty! :0 Seriously though, I guess it might be able to work if players could take missions to go down to the lower levels or fight NPCs. But IMO they should just start from scratch and make a whole new game, and fire everybody who was responsible for the CU and other changes that drove people away. They'd also have to vastly improve the quality of their customer service; part of what made me finally cancel my account with SOE was frustration over the fact that they didn't seem to value their customers. When dozens or hundreds or thousands of people complained about a change made to the game, their response was either to ignore it or raise their middle finger at us.--HanShotFirst 19:03, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
    • The problem is that people tend to only see the reaction on the official forums. Generally, people satisfied with a change don't post multiple threads announcing it. Powers 13:06, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Coruscant would never ever work in SWG, not with the current gaming engines at any rate. --Azizlight 04:09, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
  • For a new expansion, it would probably be best to have a planet unlike any other currently in the game, such as Rhen Var or Raxus Prime.

so do you think shili would ever get on starwars galaxies?User:Ivel

Timeframe in Star Wars Galaxies

Okay I know that it takes place between episodes IV and V, but what exactly would one put as the date for events ingame? Most the time I put 0 ABY, but I've seen 1 ABY too. /discuss Jondon Cenobi 06:59, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe it's approximately a year after the Battle of Yavin, but AFAIK, it's never been precisely defined. Powers 03:22, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Well Wait can we really say its Between Episode IV and V the games era seems to progress after each expansion 24.215.171.40 21:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
The original release, An Empire Divided, took place between eps IV and V. Since then, there has been much debate about the addition of new technology, old technology, Jedi, etc. They have never re-stated the timeline, despite many discussions about it on the official forums. The game took more of an EU-style fork from the storyline than sticking to Lucas' continuity. Wizzard2k 04:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Now they've added Hoth, to further confuse things...--Jondon Cenobi 05:30, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Vehicles in SWG - Which one is the largest?

I thought one fact was already added to the article- the land vehicle with the largest passenger capacity. Unfortunately it's not. What was it again? Was it some 8-passenger van called a "sand barge", whatever Jabba owned in the movie? My memory isn't serving me too well. --72.205.241.187 09:34, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

The largest-capacity land vehicle in the game is the "Transport Skiff", based on the auxiliary vehicles that accompanied Jabba's Sail Barge in Return of the Jedi. It does indeed hold eight characters, one pilot and seven passengers. It also matches the fastest land vehicles in the game. It was available only via pre-order of Trials of Obi-Wan. Powers 13:37, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Cloning during the GCW

According to tales of the bounty hunters, and SW battlefront 2, I believe, cloning was illegal during the GCW, I added it into canon inaccuracies, hope no one minds.

Wookiepedia SWG guild on Ahazi/Bria

I am interested in starting a Wookiepedia SWG guild on Ahazi/Bria. (I don't have any characters on Bria but my sister does.) Leave a message here or on my talk page :) Grand Admiral Thrawn 20px Holonet 22:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

  • That's a cool idea, though I don't think there are many SWG players here. This might be worth taking to the Senate Hall. --Azizlight 22:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC) PS. Fix your sig!
    • I just started playing the game on Bria, so I'm in. :) Adamwankenobi 20:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Sure, leave me a message on my talk page with your character name Grand Admiral Thrawn 20px Holonet 22:23, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Added Chapter 5 information

I added information regarding Chapter 5, and also performed some edits to fix capitalization, spelling, and punctuation. A further edit of this page should be conducted to find other inaccuracies. I also fixed some wording in describing the features of the game. I changed the term 'skill points' to 'skill level' since SWG no longer uses a point based system. I also removed a sentence referring to the combat medic profession seeing as that profession no longer exists. Pingsteal 09:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Major editing and revamp

After going through this article once again, I think that a major clean up of this article is needed to reflect a more neutral stance on Star Wars Galaxies. I understand that SWG is a controversial subject for many people as they have many negative feelings towards Sony Online Entertainment and thier handling of the game. That being said, I think that this article should merely stick with the fact and portray a neutral point of view as far as the information that is contained herein.

Subjects such as deviations from canon, controversey and the like, might perhaps be served by seperate articles themselves, with headers linking to those articles contained in the main article for SWG.

I'm making it a pet project of mine over the next few weeks, and perhaps months, to try and revamp not only the main SWG artcile, but also modify and add SWG related content to other articles contained in this wiki. If anyone has an alternate point of view to what I have expressed here, please feel free to let me know and perhaps we can all come up with a better solution than what I just laid out.

OUT OF DATE

This article is out of date. Please contribute to updating it

Thank you!

Looking for feedback on these suggestions.

Some thoughts on this article that I would like some outside opinions on.

1. Remove the information regarding the previous publishes. Perhaps a new article can be written that can include all the previous publishes for Star Wars Galaxies. There is a log of updates over on the SOE site and it wouldn't be hard to get the information needed for that page. That would shave some length of the current SWG page.

2. I've added some more descriptive information regarding the Pre-NGE professions, but I wonder if this is rather needed. I understand the importance of maintaining a sense of history regarding the game, but something needs to be done to shorten the length of the page. All the vertical lists of professions, skills, species and such is rather long and not neccesary.

3. The 'Release and major update history' needs to be merged with thier respective box sets and updates. It's really not ncessary to list all the box sets and major publishes multiple times with dates when only one section is needed. Reduces clutter.

4. 'Inconsistencies with Star Wars continuity' really ought to have it's own seperate article. While I do believe that inconsistencies are a valid argument against the events of canon, such a long list of those only detracts from the article. Am I the only person that thinks that needs it's own article?

5. The 'Jedi in SWG' should also be merged with the 'Inconsistencies with Star Wars continuity' and placed in it's own seperate article, or otherwise re-written to be more concise.

These are just the first of some thoughts I have, however it's late, so I'll leave this at what I have written for now.

09:43, 21 March 2007 (UTC)Pingsteal

Name of the article

I think the article should be moved to Star Wars Galaxies (without the colon). While most SW games have names like Star Wars: Battlefront or Star Wars: X-Wing, this game was (AFAIK) never spelled Star Wars: Galaxies. When it was released it was called Star Wars Galaxies: An Empire Divided which was later shortened to Star Wars Galaxies. And that's also the spelling used on the website of the game ([1]), on lucasarts.com and starwars.com.

So, if nobody has any objections, I suggest we move the article to Star Wars Galaxies. --Craven 21:28, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Images

I have a copy of the game, so if images are needed I could get some screenshotgs if acceptable. DreskBothan 16:46, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Rewrite Needed

In the section called "The Jedi in Star Wars Galaxies", it mentions something about some village (that I gather used to be a meeting point for Jedis, before the NGEs). It never actually explains what this village used to be. I've never played the game. Maybe someone who has played it can talk about this. If this village has a name, maybe a link could be added to the article about it. 70.224.226.24 01:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

The village was named Aurilia. Added that and a very brief description of it as the hub for NPC-directed Force sensitive questing.

Item Articles

I've noticed that a few items I figured would be considered canon but only appear in SWG don't have articles(ie. DE-10) Are there currently any rules against creating such an article? Kyp Fisto 04:59, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

  • There is no such rule, though people are a little split on the issue. Go for it :-) --Azizlight 06:08, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Publishes/Chapters and Major Updates

Perhaps this is just a quirk of mine, but I feel that major updates such as the Combat Upgrade and NGE are seperate from the publish and chapter updates that are put out every so often. I don't believe the major updates history needs to become a listing of each Chapter and thier description in the game. Such information should have it's own seprate article entitled 'Published updates to Star Wars Galaxies' or something similiar.

Am I alone in this line of thinking or no?

Pingsteal 06:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

  • I'd go a bit further - I don't think there's any need for the amount of detail provided for the individual NGE publishes / chapters. A brief overall summary of the noteworty additions and the reintroduction of game elements eliminated in the original release of the NGE would suffice. DirthNader 17:23, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Expansion sections

Why don't we have each expansion on its own article? That works for Empire at War's expansion. Shouldn't that logic apply to both here and the Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds article? Jorrel 20px Fraajic 17:21, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Improvement drive and redundancy

There's a whole heap of redundancy in this article. I made an attempt at removing some of it, but it was very quickly reverted. Perhaps the large number of removals were presumed to be vandalism, or I simply missed some other protocol.

The content in sections 5.2, 5.3, and 5.4 (the expansions) is essentially identical to the content in 6.1 - 6.3, and the content in section 8 (compilations) is covered in 5.5. 4.3 - 4.5 not only seem out of place under the "Story" heading, but they're at least partially covered in 3.6 (Combat Mechanics).

Section 3.14.6 (Force powers) is also redundant - Force powers were one of many Force disciplines available in the game, and it's listed appropriately in section 3.14.5.

Would someone like to explain why this amount of redundant information is beneficial to this entry and/or what protocol I violated by removing the redundant sections? Thanks!

DirthNader 17:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

  • I agree, but one remedy (see Expansion Sections post above) would be to create new articles for each expansion and leave a limited amount on the main article that we are working on. Does anyone else have an objection to this ? Jedi Master Fiolli 14:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
  • There is also redundancy between sections 3.9 to 3.13 and whole section 9. Scrollbox looks ok for the big amount of content. Other thoughts to decide wich one should be removed? Thinortolan 18:13, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Emulator Projects (Plural)

there are a number of Emulator projects for Star Wars Galaxies, the Emu not being the only one though it was the first, some might argue that the Emu project now isnt the one it was before, with nearly all the devs having left to form SWGANH, I added a link to SWGANH as well as one for the rather large expansion/mod project called Outer Heaven, but I come back and the links were removed?

Emulators aren't in line with SOE's TOS so The wikia cannot post links to them or endorse the idea. Also posting a link to some random emulators is pretty much advertising which is also a no-no on wiki articles 76.115.211.185 04:42, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

TOS is not a law its an agrement between the user and the provider. And all parts of it are not legally binding outised US either. Also reverse engineering the server side is perfectly legal. So the EMU projects is not doing anything wrong. Since the original SWG is not supported anymore it practically abandonware, since what bears its name today is a totally different product. Its like buying a car and a year later the manufacter come along and force you to switch engine and colour to something you don't like. :)

  • Think of it as the same reason we don't add information about mods or cheats when it comes to other Star Wars games. Its not the purpose of this website. If you want a cheats, mods, or emulation website, there are plenty of other places to find it. OLIOSTER (talk) 20px 11:57, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

True but it still should be mentioned.

  • No, it shouldn't. Not only is it not the purpose of this website, but these emulation projects are not supported by LucasArts or Sony Online Entertainment, and as a result, not official in any way, shape, or form. OLIOSTER (talk) 20px 12:14, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

It is a part of the history of the game and a effect of SoE revamping the game twice in 6 months. As such its shoud at least be mentioned that it happened, on the inforamation page about the game. And what does being supported by LEC & SoE have to do with it, or are you like a few of the ppl on Wiki where it took a year to manage to even get a mention of the EMU'd to stay on the entry for SWG. It is history and it should be honest not try to cover things up that certain peopke do not like. Now if the EMU where actually illegal I wouldn kind of understand.....

  • It doesn't matter. I have given two reasons why they aren't mentioned and any continued attempt to add this information to the article will be undone. OLIOSTER (talk) 20px 11:44, December 22, 2009 (UTC)

Ah so it is just personal opinion then.

  • How is it personal opinion? How is the fact that 1) We just don't cover those things here (mods, cheats, emulation) and 2) Its not official a personal opinion? OLIOSTER (talk) 20px 11:53, December 22, 2009 (UTC)

I'm not asking youto cover those things just mention that it happened, whats the harm? Or should we start to stop mentioning other things that happened and try to erase it from the history. I just want a few words that mention that people got pised of and tried to make pre changes server emulators. In any words that may fit :)

contacting

does any one now how to contact the creatores of the game about sugestions? User:Ivel

You can use the official forums to post suggestions, many developers read them regularly (although they don't post much). Or try to talk to them on gaming conventions or the next Fan Fest. --Craven 03:40, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. P.S. list some species you would like to see on the game on my user talk page.User:Ivel

family

I heard that you can have a Family on SG. is that true?

I am no expert on MMORPGs but...

Is this really one of the most popular MMORPGs in the United States? First off, I can't find that anywhere in it's source. Secondly, all I can find about the game says that it is perceived as a horrible MMORPG with dwindling numbers. I mean, I have heard a lot about people leaving the game and being fed up with the changes they make. They seem to have all kinds of things to try to get people to play the game like this: [2] . Really, several thousand subscribers? Can anyone actually confirm that?(- -) 14:23, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

"Several thousand" is actually an understatement. At the time it was written, "a hundred thousand" probably would have been too small. The last known for sure data on subscriber numbers was that "50,000" was "vastly wrong", implying that the number was much higher than that.
The phrase "one of the most popular MMORPGs in the United States" is another issue entirely. Estimating based on the estimates at MMOGCHART.COM, I would say the following: Certainly World of Warcraft has more; it's in a class by itself. Final Fantasy XI has more subscribers than SWG overall, but it's hard to say how many of those subscribers are in the United States. Same with Lineage and Lineage II. Runescape, EverQuest, EverQuest II, City of Heroes, Lord of the Rings Online, and EVE Online probably have more US subscribers than SWG does. Dofus has more subscribers but they're mostly in France.
Based on all that, I would say SWG is no better than seventh and no worse than tenth in U.S. subscriber numbers. But that's just a guess, based on MMOGCHART's questionable numbers, and estimating how many of those are in the U.S. Certainly SWG is one of the most well-known American MMORPGs, and it was at one time number two in U.S. subscriber numbers (behind only EverQuest), but where it stands today is hard to say for sure. Powers 20:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Rage of the Wookies Sentence

There is a sentence in the continuity issues section that describes the new armor and fighters you can get in the expansion pack.

"Clone Wars technology was released into the game with the launch of its second expansion titled Rage of the Wookiees, an Expansion released to capitalize on the Theatrical Release of Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. The items released into the game environment proved to be vastly more popular then the current Galactic Civil War era technology, and as thus the Clone Wars gear also proved to be vastly superior to the current technology as well. These things included Clone Trooper Armor, the Aggressive ReConnaissance-170 starfighter which is often referred to as the ARC-170, and this Fighter is available to Rebel Aligned Pilots through a quest. Also the Eta-2 Actis-class light interceptor is available to Imperial Aligned Pilots through a quest and has become a vastly popular Fighter for the PvP Dog Fighting environment of the game. Also, several new Clone Wars era Rifles and Carbines and Vehicles, such as the BARC Speeder Bike, were released into the game, and are all are now vastly popular and used throughout the entire game environment."

Shouldn't this be in the trivia section, none of it contradicts official canon as far I know.

Why is it a ghost town

Ive been reading stuuf on the internet and they all say thst its abandoned. It was my favorite rpg for a while until the NGE but will they ever have another rpg as good as galaxies

Viruses?

I am a huge star wars fan and i wanted to get into Star Wars Galaxies. Does anyone know of any viruses that can be caused by Star Wars Galaxies though?

Contradictions

I've never actually played this game, but I've been around a while on the wookieepedia site and seen references here and there in Behind the Scenes sections where often, it speaks about how something in Star Wars galaxies is directly clashing (to varying extents) with already-established canon. Now, as much as I love them, I know that video games are notorious for contradicting canon - or at least confused speculation, particularly Battle Front I & II and The Force Unleashed (or at least from what we've seen of it thus far), and I've been wondering how seriously things from these video games are to be taken, especially in terms of when things are a certain way because someone didn't do their homework and included something for either appearances sake or for gameplay-ability. I imagine this varies from game to game, obviously, but, from what I've gathered, Star Wars Galaxies is rated pretty low on the scale when two or more conflicting sources come into play, is this correct? Or is it simply safer to assume that most things in SWG are largely ambiguously canon, due to the often nonsensicalness of certain game elements (such as Geonosians establishing a facility on Yavin IV). 129.107.81.12 23:10, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

  • Despite what the current official policy of LFL states, most EU fans know enough to ignore most of the video games from a historical perspective. Sure, there may be canonical characters, planets and elements in the games, but the games are designed: a) to be games, not literary endeavors or character expositions, b) to appeal to the wider gaming community, not EU readers, c) without thought of adhering to the historicity of the EU (unlike the authors of the novels, comics and short stories who actually do intensive research). 72.80.168.178 04:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Things I am removing from the article and why

These are all under the inconsistencies section.

"All players start out following the standard new character leveling quests which turns each player—including Jedi—into a minion of the crime lord Jabba the Hutt. If the player's profession is Jedi, it creates an inconsistency." - You're not actually forced into doing these quests. You could choose never to do a single one, so it doesn't create an inconsistency of a Light Side Jedi doing evil things. If a Light Side Jedi chose to do these evil things, it's not inconsistent, because there's been instances of that in SW history. :P

"Jedi can pursue dark and light side abilities through the expertise system (introduced after the NGE) and mix abilities of both sides as they like without penalty." - Outdated as of GU4; there is a penalty now. For example, if you're in a Light Side stance, you cannot use Force Lightning, Force Choke, Force Drain, etc. If you're in a Dark Side stance, you cannot use Forsake Fear, or Lightsaber Reflect, or benefit from the Light Side heal bonus.

"CompForce Trooper NPCs are often aliens, such as Rodians. They are equipped with non-continuity clothing and armor (rather, standard overall from SWGs clothing stock)." - This is outdated information.

"Many key and canonical characters are visible simultaneously throughout the Game Environment, as opposed to keeping them rare and in one location. This gives an illusion that such individuals had clone copies of themselves placed strategically throughout the galaxy." - The reason that there are multiple NPCs in different places was certainly not designed to say that there are clones of them. It's a gameplay mechanic; the character can't be in both places at once, so from the character's perspective, there is only one of them.

"Credit currency is highly devalued, as even days-old characters can obtain amounts over the hundred thousands in a single day only from server-generated rewards, like ground and space loot sale." - Each server has its own economy, so it's impossible to generalize this.

"Clone Wars technology was released into the game..." - The Clone Wars was 20 years ago, it's not an inconsistency to have Clone Wars technology in SWG. Vader's suit is "Clone wars technology", yet nobody can deny that it's present in Star Wars. In real life, one of the most popular sidearms for military forces is the Colt M1911 - a weapon design that's almost 100 years old. Furthermore, this section contains several factual inaccuracies. The ARC170 is NOT a powerful ship; people generally do not fly the ship except for novelty value. Similarly, Clone Armor is vastly inferior to crafted armor and contains no sockets (that is, it cannot be enhanced, like crafted armor can be.)

I hope this won't be an issue. Soulknife 15:40, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

End?

In some years this game's servers would be shut down. What is going to be with the facts statet by this game when their primary source will be unavailible? I hope they let running at least a viewable and walkable, but not playable version - if it is possible. Darth Morrt 21:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Removed Speculation

There's no proof that the new Bioware/LA project is a KotOR MMO, so I removed it from the article as it sounded somewhat definite the way it was written ~Anon User

There is now proof, as it has been announced. -AnonYMOUS User Yeah it's called SWtor--ArchemporerRamis 06:33, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

That's what happens when people post unsigned comments : we don't know when they were posted. Most likely the op made this one when TOR had not yet been officially announced.--Petiflo 13:50, January 4, 2010 (UTC)

Split

As per Forum:CT:Expansion Packs: Gotta keep 'em separated. this article should be split, so each game expansion could have its own article. Mauser 21:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Timeline

It's been officially stated that the time line hasn't actually moved forward, and that Hoth is it's own timeline. It's very fuzzy from the development team on what time frame the game is in, and I'm wondering if this should be marked under time line in some way.StavesAndSabers 03:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Story lines

I've never played, but I do have a question; Is there enough information or a canon ending for the various story lines, so they can get their own articles detailing what's happened? I'm interested in information regarding the Death Trooper book and the Blackwing virus, and followed the link from that article to the Galaxies article only to find no information what so ever on it.66.19.93.186 19:50, January 29, 2010 (UTC)

can you talk

  1. REDIRECT CC-7567can you talk freely on star wars galaxies