Talk:Silent Hill 3/Archive 1

Endings

Whoa guys, little bit of lacking research on this topic. Firstly, the primary (normal-good)ending is far less speculation. The book "Lost Memories" takes apart the endings of Silent Hill 1-3. Almost all endings are left "Open to interpretation", especially those found in 2 where no clear ending is ever intended. But the creators have stated the UFO endings are the only "true" paths, so if not taken light heartedly...Also, I can't believe the 4th ending was left out. C'mon guys, little more work here!

There are only 3 endings for Silent Hill 3.--Gone923 03:19, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Summary

"The Nightmare Begins/Summary" at the beginning talks about Heather dying in her dream because of the rollercoaster. However, there are several other ways she can die in this part of the game: she can fall down the bottomless pits to the right of the park, or be killed by the monsters on the other side of the door on the left (directions based on where Heather starts off at the beginning of the game). --Anam

Influences and Trivia Section?

What is the Influence and Trivia section about? It is to show random info on the games, but also to show what outside sources may have influenced certain aspects of the game. Of course you need proof to back this up, and there most certainly is with the issue of the song Sickness Unto Foolish Death. Sickness Unto Death has too much of a similarity to the title, both the obvious one, and the fact that the themes tie in perfectly. I have already linked the paragraph up with a internet version of Sickness Unto Death and I think most people after reading it would agree that the song and the book has too much in common to be ignored. Loui Da Boss

Trivia question: The entries for the first two games have an explanation of the UFO ending, but not the third, and I can't seem to find a clear explanation of it online anywhere. Can someone with a bit more information add this to the entry? PratzStrike 17:50, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

The third ufo ending is just Heather coming home to find Harry in a chair talking to an alien, with James hiding behind a curtain. Nothing special. Edit: I added the ending for you. Maybe someone will add the other endings some day... --thaddius

On Sexism

It is refreshing to see a female protagonist who is taken a little more seriously than usual, and who is not necessarily just 'eye candy'.

I don't find this refreshing. But that is just my own POV. Hint hint. --buck 14:51, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I find it nice for a change, but since Japanese games now feature just as much, if not more, sexy male eye candy for the female gamers, I don't think attractive video game girls are something that should be considered sexist. -- Dez26

I'm the one who wrote the original section. I guess no one liked it so it was removed. Regardless, I do find it sexist that the only women represented are scantly clad. If you don't find it sexist that's your perogative, I thought I gave some intersting evidence though (The DOA series and the Metroid endings). Whoever removed it must think my point not valid. thaddius 18:10, 22 April 2006

Well the point I was trying to make was that the statement was bordering on POV by using highly un-encyclopedic phrasing (it is "refreshing" to see the female lead "taken a little more seriously than usual"), and nothing to do with sexism. I never meant to imply that the arguement was invalid, or that it should be removed. Nor do I actually find it offensive that a female video game character is not scantily clad. I was dropping a "hint" that someone should rephrase it with less slanted words, that's all. The rest was just you jokers assuming I was being a perv! Peace. --buck 14:51, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Nothing to do with sexism? Odd. I thought the whole point was that it was a less exist approach to games.

I edited my blurb a little. If you guys are interested in having it reposted let me know what you think should be changed to make it less 'POV'. I will try to find sources for this as well. I assure there are many articles on sexism in video games, but there seem to be very few on SH3s role. Possibly because Heather is not highly sexualized. You don't agree with me, fine, but I personally feel, and have discussed this with a few others, that Heather is not as sexualized as most other female chracters are. You may find that there is equal opportunity sexualization, but the GTA protagonists or MGS's Snake and his mullet, or countless others are not really 'eye candy'. Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball is a perfect example of my point.

This game was heralded for having a female protagonist who is not highly sexualized. While the main character, Heather, a teenage girl, is wearing a short skirt, her boots are knee length, hiding much of her legs. Her chest is also hidden by a 'puffy' vest she wears throughout the game. Other female characters from other games tend to be scantly clad 'bimbos' (Lara Croft from Tomb Raider and every female character from the Dead or Alive Series are just a few examples) or the player is rewarded with a 'revealing' screen if the player meets certain requirements (the first three games in the Metroid series feature the chracter Samus Aran in a bathing suit if the game is completed in under 1-3 hours). It is certainly different to see a female protagonist who is taken a little more seriously than usual, and who is not necessarily just 'eye candy'. It is true that Silent Hill 3 features unlockable clothes for Heather, but these are mere variations on a theme with t-shirts and pants, not bikinis and sports bras.

Nothing to do with sexism? Odd. I thought the whole point was that it was a less [s]exist approach to games.

SH3 is unique because it has a female protagonist that is not highly sexualized. You want to make that point, fine. I, nor anyone, have any problem with that. I have never played this game, nor any of the other games mentioned (save the first Tomb Raider on my PC back in college), so I have no issue with whether or not the game has a sexualized female lead character. Personally, I don't really give a flip. My only point was that the phrasing was unencyclopedic. The same could be applied to an article about the cotton gin: "It is refreshing to see a piece of agricultural machinery that is taken a little more seriously than usual." That, my friend, is what I was getting at by stating that I did not have issue with the sexism itself. But it's a moot point, really, since that portion of the article has been removed anyway. --buck 14:51, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think you understand. I agree with you. I've admitted that. I'm just trying to get it changed to be more 'encyclopedic'. Although it may just end up being deleted again... --Thaddius 02:18, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Endings

I added a list of endings to both the silent hill and silent hill 2 sections. Anyone object to me doing it for this site? --thaddius

I've made the entry (finally) and no one can stop me. --Thaddius 13:28, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Mason vs. Morris

The protagonist's name in Silent Hill 3 is Heather Mason, not Heather Morris. User:Arius1987 (sign your posts with four tildes (~))

She was renamed Heather Morris by the witness protection program and, yes, her name is Mason (althrough her first name is Cheryl, not Heather), but calling her that is kind of a spoiler. --Thaddius 19:55, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Possably, but nowhere in the official game did I read her name was changed. The manual says morris.--Rebootedrock 23:00, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

>>This Topic currently under moderation here: [1] Launchpad_72 10:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Launchpad 72 (talk • contribs)

Mason-ry

Can somone revert the changes that turned Morris to Mason? Her name in the game in Heather Morris for all intents and purposes. Calling her Heather Mason is a "spoiler". --Thaddius 19:00, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Since no one seemed to want to do it, I did it. --Thaddius 14:08, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Just so no one changes it, I made the name simply 'Heather (Silent Hill)' to prevent an editing war about the name. Clearly people disagree on what her name is in the game. --Thaddius 05:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Second Jacob's ladder influence

Someone stated that there's 'another reference to jacob's ladder' and describes a scene in the game, but does not explain how this is related to the film in question, or how it's any different from the other 'influce' involving jacob's ladder. --Thaddius 16:47, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Spelling

My bad. I looked it up and there is no universal guideline for spelling, it just pertains to the most applicable language. And since this game was intended for Americans first, and that it presumably takes place in the States, humor, as much as it pains me, is correct. --Thaddius 18:03, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Trimming the ending section

However, this ending creates a paradox: If one gets the UFO ending in the first Silent Hill game, Harry never receives the baby that becomes Heather. Because Heather arrives to find that Harry has a sort of friendship with the aliens, it assumes that the first game's UFO ending was the canonically correct one, therefore Heather would not have existed in order to become the protagonists of Silent Hill 3. But then, it is worth noting that their status as 'joke' endings inherently allow them a farcical lack of continuity, and to speculate about their status as canon, and the contradictions therein, is the mark of a true non-sequitor.

Is this all really needed? The text for the UFO ending is twice as long as the other two. It's a bit long-winded. I'm going to delete it for now, but if someone wants to re-write it and trim it down, feel free. Levid37 03:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Annoying little thing

I noticed this was nominated for GA. The very first thing that smacks me is that the sources should come after the punctuation (be it full stops, commas or anything else) not before. — Realist² 17:58, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

And to think the last article I GAd (Uncharted: Drake's Fortune), the reviewer demanded I put them before commas and after full stops before it passed as a GA. *shrug* SynergyBlades (talk) 18:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, that was unfortunate advise. Well anyway it looks better now. :-) — Realist² 19:13, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

That said, the whole bottom paragraph of the reception section isn't sourced and neither are some of the grades in the table. It might be better to just remove it if you can't source it. That's better than it failing GA. — Realist² 19:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I know, I had kept that in there from before I started the article cleanup. Probably best to remove it since it doesn't really fit in with the rest of the section, which draws upon multiple sources. SynergyBlades (talk) 21:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Silent Hill 3/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   Well done.

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   In the lead, add a hyphen between "mid 2003". Dates need to be unlinked, per here. Throughout the Plot section, change the hypens to an endash, per here. The link to "Michael Kaufman" needs to be fixed.

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   Reference 1 is missing an accessdate.

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:10, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I think I've managed to correct everything mentioned. SynergyBlades (talk) 21:21, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you to SynergyBlades for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)