Talk:Banjo-Kazooie (video game)/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I think it's better to have actual screenshots of the game... and if promotional renders are included, they should be described as such. Fredrik 17:24, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

And then another one :P I don't think this is such a good idea. Rare can promote the game themselves, the article benefits much more from having actual screenshots of the game. Fredrik 19:19, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

I just didnt think the screenshot that was there was very informative, perhaps we should try to find a better in-game render that is more closeup and doesnt have that intro text all over it. We should however make a note that these are not in-game screenshots but rather art, However i think it adds very much especially to the story Grunthilda can be seen chasing the duo and in the latter they are picking up a Magical Jigsaw. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 21:03, 2004 May 18 (UTC)

The "Banjo series" template already contains information on sequels and provides adequate links. In addition, information from the "sequels and ports" section is being moved to their related sections.

"While the game did recieve good reviews at the time of it's release, it is often critiqued by gamers as "not aging well"--or the fact that the game looks like just another "archaic" platformer by today's standards. While the series does pertain a critical fanbase, it it also perceived by a select few to not be any innovative movement in gaming, simply because it was so much like Super Mario 64. While the game did feature a select amount of elements that were new to the 3D platformer genre, it is true that many similarities can be made between the two games, such as a similar control scheme, and the camera control scheme. Another problem gamers had with the game was the amount of objects the player was required to collect in order to progress through the game, and the game's stages. Banjo-Kazooie is infamous for creating the notorious term "collect-o-thon" which is a term used to mean that a game features a vast amount of monotonous object collecting through non-linear environments."

This whole paragraph is nonsense. I'm deleting it, it can be put back when it has some citing. I've also never heard of the term "collect-o-thon," and its obvious to anyone who has played Banjo Kazooie that it is not linear.

Agreed. The perspective seems slanted and inobjective, besides. Nice revision: let's try to keep this article as informative and neutral as possible, folks.

--AaronOfAbsalom 19:53, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with you on this. That critique of the game shows both possible opinions on it, and if you have not heard of the term "collectathon" then clearly you do not take enough interest in gaming communities.

It still doesn't have a reference attached, thus making the whole thing a bunch of

original research that can't be included in the article. Also, watch what you say here and never make assumptions. I am an avid gamer and I had never heard the term "collect-o-thon" until I read this paragraph and, even then, google hits for "collect-o-thon" cap out at 25, "collect-a-thon" gets less than 900, and "collectathon" doesn't even reach 3,000 so I wouldn't even say it is a very widely used term, outside or inside the gaming world. Your assumption about this editor is baseless. --pIrish

21:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I figured this would be the place to ask, but what are peoples thoughts on Stop 'N' Swop getting its own article? It's a pretty big mystery, for gaming at least, but it would probably only interest B-K and B-T fans. On the other hand, there are articles for Minor NPCs from Morrowind like Fargoth. So, what are your guys thoughts? -- A Non-member

In my humble opinion, it might be a good idea... it just depends on how comprehensive of our coverage should be. To be honest, I really don't know. — Ambush Commander^(Talk) 16:36, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

I'll try to get the guys at the Rare Witch Project to help, since I'm a member. These are the people who found the GS and Sand Castle codes, so it should be pretty comprehensive if they do help. - The Non-Member

Okay, I'm a member now. Anyone have the old 'Follow the Jellyfish' rumor from the GameFAQs BT boards saved? There's no one there from when that happened except for me. And I'm still waiting for Ice Mario or SubDrag to answer. -Penquin

Given the fact that this is one of the only things that keeps people still talking about the game it is indeed appropriate that it receives its own article. Briton

This has already been discussed on the

Stop 'N' Swop article discussion. The page was brought up for deletion February 15 of this year, but no consensus was made (though most seemed to favor a merge to this page or the series page). --pIrish

21:43, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Should we put in here that weird noise that Banjo makes sometimes? It can be heard in the BK3 teaser trailer and various times throughout the game.69.140.136.43 19:58, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Is this worthy enough for a Good Article or be nominated for one? Or a featured article? RedEyesMetal 19:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Probably not. Though it may be able to squeak by as a good article, I doubt it. It needs sources. As of right now, it has zero, which I think is a major criteria for good article candidacy. If we can get some sources or references for some stuff (see The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess for a great example), I'd love to see it get nominated. --pIrish ^{talk, contribs} 19:23, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm surprised to see my edits reverted; what you call "game-guide in tone", I call "cleaning up a mess of atrocious grammar". I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that, these days, people generally can't tell the difference. aruffo 02:25, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, wait a minute.. now I read the rest of the discussion.. you mean that the paragraph is too much like a game guide, regardless of how it's written. Well, anyway. I don't have a vested interest in the article-- I'm just passing by-- so I'll leave it alone. aruffo 02:33, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

says BK was going to be about a boy and a pirate for SNES?

Well there was a game called Dream...IT got turned into BK if that's what your talking about... Angry Sun 02:28, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

There are beta screenshots that proove that Hammerhead Beach is actually an original name for Treasure Trove Cove and not an entirely different world. Should this be changed? 86.31.244.242 10:31, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

See

Just64helpin

11:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

From the screenshots I have seen of Hamerhead beach, it appears to be a place Banjo, Kazooie, Mumbo and the "Mellon Girl" go on vacation where Mumbo will show you secret pictures for use in Banjo-Tooie (In his own words, more or less). This is after you beat Grunty and may only happen if you have all 100 Jiggies (despite the fact it is possible to get 102, this is reportedly because Rareware was worried certan jiggies were simply too difficult to get) So It's in the game, but it's not a level. --Abominable Toaster (talk) 22:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

• Okay should we mention how famous B-K Rated E? is.
• Also I think we should clear-up some of the secret features like Bottles Bonus. And a little bit about sharkfood island.
• And maybe those maps in Rusty Bucket Bay.
• And the material im B-K rated E? I know some of it is fake but some of it has been stated by the makers of BK.
• Also I think we could possibly talk about the whole breeguls not being real subject.
• Maybe a little more character explanations with the characters.

Need info on clear up sections look here!!! thank you!!--Anfish (talk) 00:57, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Is Clanker a shark or a whale? He has a blowhole, but his other features are very fish-like.

I personally think shark is more fitting. I've actually just tried to find a reliable site which says what he is, but to no avail. Might have to dig out some old magazines. --

Steel

20:52, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Clanker is a living garbage disposal...

Acording to Rareware he is a whale, but admittely resembles a shark more. --Abominable Toaster (talk) 22:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, You're gonna have to find a citation on that, simply saying something without -actual- proof doesn't count. Anyone have an *official* game guide, perhaps it'll say in there. Without official citation if even *one* person thinks against what is put, it can be challenged. Personally I always saw him as a shark as well. Sparky-sama (talk) 17:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Although this probably isn't accurate I'll just put it in here. Clanker due to him being made of metal and most likely an underwater cyborg is actually a hybrid of the two. Ergo he's not a true living being and he was reconstructed as a shark but was originally a whale which explains the blowhole. It's probably not true but it's at least what I think. --Flashpenny (talk) 23:03, 17 February 2009 (UTC)Flashpenny

In the plot section, it says that Spiral Mountain is inhabited by Banjo, Kazooie and Bottles but in Banjo-Tooie, we visit Bottles' house outside of Spiral Mountain. Should it be removed then? 91.105.78.56 (talk) 17:13, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I changed it myself because Bottles is clearly shown as living on Isle o' Hags not Spiral Mountain. Thanks for answering (!) 91.105.96.56 (talk) 19:14, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not going to change anything (since the article is actually pretty much permanently damaged now and I'm too lazy to do antyhing) but just pointing out. Spiral Mountain is technically part of the Isle O' Hags even though it's landlocked from the rest of the island so long as it's on the same isle it is technically part of the Isle O' Hags (for this same reason Cloud Cuckooland in the sequel isn't part of the Isle O' Hags contrary to popular belief).--Flashpenny (talk) 23:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC)Flashpenny

Does anyone know the actual release date of the game? IGN was the first site I looked at which provided the same date as the one in the article (June 30 1998) but, looking at several other sites, some have the release date at the end of May. 137.149.236.192 (talk) 06:07, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I'm just curious why the plus sign has to be clicked to "Show" the Release Dates. Why not display them all the time? I also noticed the same thing with the Banjo-Tooie article. Seems kind of unusual, but maybe it's just me. Regards, 24.10.181.254 (talk) 16:16, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Frederik, your placement of the image to the right would have been right except that there is one exception to that rule, that is if the content of the picture faces to the right, in that case images should be on the left side, the 'face' in the picture should always face inwards, see for example the Bumblebee article. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 22:48, 2004 May 18 (UTC)

This image doesn't really point anywhere. There's action in both ways; Kazooie, whose face is the most prominent in the picture, is facing left. It looks good either way, as far as that issue is concerned. But I'm of course not primarily concerned about the direction, I'm concerned about the fact that breaking text justification on the left side is highly distracting for a reader. Having it on the left side additionally breaks the balance of the page layout (it all ends up on the left).

If the image is facing right, it should preferrably be mirrored to face left. This can't be done here since the image contains a logo that can't be mirrored, but since the direction is only vaguely pronounced in this image, it isn't a problem. I don't like the layout at bumblebee either, but for some reason I find the image there less distracting. Ideally that one should be mirrored and moved to the right. Fredrik 22:59, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

Banjo is going left, so is the witch and the whole thing climaxes in the right-bottom corner. I think that if anything it adds to the balance of the page, what layout problems are you having exactly? Text should wrap equally well around images regardless of whether the image is to the left or right.

And about starting to turn images i havent heard any other complaints about it being distracting, but dont start turning pictures because of that because consensus has been reached on that images can go on both sides of an article. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 23:14, 2004 May 18 (UTC)

Page balance - edge of text. And the text on the left after the intro disappears under the image, which is distracting. I still hold that the direction of the image is too vaguely pronounced to justify the current position. In either case, there's another solution: swapping the two images. I'd still like to see both images on the right, but this one will do less harm if placed on the left a bit down.

Where was the consensus reached? I've seen discussions of image placement that reached the consensus that images should not be placed on the left. Fredrik 23:28, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

I think i've fixed your image problem by forcing a break after the intro ( the reccomended thing with such float problems ), About where those guidelines i have not been able to dig them up, however i do remember reading them.. somewher, but i tend to loose things. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 23:37, 2004 May 18 (UTC)

Regardless of layout issues, how do you feel about this?--Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 23:41, 2004 May 18 (UTC)

Looks nice, adding it, complain here if you have a issue;) --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 23:48, 2004 May 18 (UTC)

There's another table format being discussed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and Video Games/Template/. #8 currently. Fredrik 23:56, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

See you've replaced it, looks great! --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 10:46, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.99.169.83 (talk) 20:25, 4 October 2010 (UTC) 

Listing and giving descriptions on every single level is unnecessary. --

I agree.

Wikipedia is not a game guide. DanPMK

10:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Just in case anyone is thinking of disagreeing, take a look at featured articles

Steel

11:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I also think they should be removed. That information is better suited for wikibooks. --pIrish 12:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. First of all, they arent a "Guide" to the game. It doesnt list what Jiggies are where, its just a general summary of each level so people who aren't familiar with this game can learn about them. Although it would be a good idea not to simply remove them, but to shorten them to just give a very brief general summary of the levels. I'll do that now. DietLimeCola 13:20, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I've made a HUGE change to this section. I've left the two primary, and most important, worlds and I've drastically reduced the extra worlds. I think the information on the eggs and the keys should go under a seperate section as then we start getting into a game guide sort of thing. Plus, it wouldn't hurt to have it as a "mystery surrounding these items" sort of thing as they were never really given explained. Anyway, tell me what you think, but please don't revert it without discussion as I think this could be a way to solve the problem of it being too lengthy and out-of-place to the article, but not making it disappear either. --pIrish 17:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh, wait, there already was a section for the eggs and keys (Stop and Swap). Why on earth was so much emphasis put on them within the individual worlds? --pIrish 17:30, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Can someone convert it into prose rather than having it as a list? --

Err, I'm not sure prose would be the best way to go. A list shows it clear-cut, this is exactly what this is. Prose was sort of what we already had. I think. Unless I'm thinking of a different definition for prose? (which is very possible as I haven't actually heard the word prose since my freshman year at uni) --pIrish 17:46, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

A paragraph. --

Steel

17:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Do you want to do it? I'm not sure I could without making it sound a bit awkward, but I can try it later if you want (I've got to start working on a paper for school). --pIrish 18:00, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I started but it sounded weird and so I stopped. That list does need to go though. Using lists is discouraged (though I don't have the particular page that says that to hand). --

Steel

18:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I think lists are good for some things, but, for the most part, one should stay away from them. I'm thinking this may be one of those cases where there really isn't any other way to put forth the information without making it seem weird. I also tried to find something about lists being discouraged, but I came up empty-handed. Maybe this mostly applied to articles that are purely lists? Like the List of Nintendo 64 games. I know those are greatly discouraged for the most part. --pIrish 18:14, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Well none of the featured articles I linked to above use lists in any way. --

Steel

18:20, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, were just trying to give people a general basic idea of what the game is all about. Mentioning worlds and a few details about doesn't make it look bad. I believe this article is just fine the way it is, so good job to whoever made those edits, they look VERY clean! Lets just keep it the way it is for now. By the way, shouldnt these edits be done to Banjo-Tooie too? DietLimeCola 20:11, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

(de-indent)Yeah, do the same to Tooie's article. It still needs to be de-listified, but I can't be bothered right now. Also, we're not supposed to be using words like "You" in the encyclopedia. I dunno if they were already there or if someone's added them recently, but they'll have to go at some point too. --

• 'Ah ok I see. Also I just realized one more area that should be shortened - Stop 'n' Swop. I realize that this "feature" is very interesting and puzzling, but why should that take up most of the article? I'll try to trim it down later. DietLimeCola 20:19, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
• I've made a similar list to this one on the Banjo-Tooie page. I also cleared out all the references to "you" on this page that I could find. --[[User:PIrish|pIrish ^{[[User_talk:pIrishl|(talk)]]}]] 20:56, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry to interject but I see that you have made a big mistake when it comes to the levels of Banjo-Kazooie. You have said that Grunty's Furnace Fun is a level but its not! Its more of a boss and you cannot get a jigsaw in the quiz and credits come once you complete the quiz and not to mention that you can only do Grunty's Furnace Fun once so I say no to the suggestion that Grunty's Furnace Fun is a level. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.99.169.83 (talk) 20:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

While digging through the online print archive, I located the following print preview material for this game:

• Next Generation Magazine Preview
• Next Generation Magazine Preview
• Next Generation Magazine Preview
• Electronic Gaming Monthly Preview
• Game Informer Preview

One or more print reviews for this game may also be found in the archive. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 15:36, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Banjo-Kazooie/GA1

So, I decided to come and look at the page on the 17^th anniversary of the release of the game. As I re-read the article for the umpteenth time, I noticed something off. The North American release date was changed. I wondered, "Who would change the date forward a day?" So, I looked at the change logs.

Starting on the 21^st of June (revision #667857548), and continuing through the 25^nd (revision #668570522), there were a series of edits made with the main change being the release date of the game in North America. Originally, the article stated that the release date was the 29^th of June, 1998. First, someone said that the release date was the 31^st of May. Then, someone reverted that edit back to the 29^th, but then the person who wrote the 31st reverted it back to their last edit, citing "unsourced content". Then, another person came along and changed the date to the 30^th of June.

I'm going to say that the 29^th of June is right, and I can prove it, once and for all. My source: Here. This is a tweet from @RareLtd, acknowledging that the date of the 31^st of May is wrong, and that the date of the 29^th of June is the right one. I'm going to recommend that someone change the dates back to the 29th. If someone comes along and changes it again, direct them to the tweet I've linked. This should stop all the debate. I hope. 72.209.157.22 (talk) 16:39, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

As part of their "Rare Revealed" series on YouTube, Rare has released an episode focusing on Dream and its transition into Banjo-Kazooie. The video includes a lot of previously-unknown details regarding the game's development, such as Banjo originally having a skater motif and gameplay originally being based on more 2.5D movement. Would someone be willing to comb through the video and add the relevant details to the article? -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 17:20, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Rare just put this out yesterday. Is there anything in here that we can use into the article? -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 13:50, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

I've read from numerous different websites that there's a video game scene from a movie called "The Beach" that was apparently inspired in part by Banjo-Kazooie according to the film's director, Danny Boyle, but I haven't really been able to find any incredibly reliable sources supporting it. Does anyone know more about this? Is it something that he brings up in the audio commentary on the DVD or something? Can someone possibly look more into this to see if they can find out more about it?? TheDisneyGamer (talk) 20:37, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Project Dream is an article that should be merged as it's history and pictures can easily be implanted on the Banjo Kazooie article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.127.75.241 (talk) 20:47, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Actually, I

Czar: might also be interested in this because he has expanded and improved several Rare articles lately. --Niwi3 (talk

) 23:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I was planning to bring Dream up to GA a few months ago, but since Rare has opened up about the game in recent weeks, I think something like that would be much easier to accomplish. It definitely has enough coverage and content for its own article, let alone a GA, which I still have plans for. In fact, Project Dream was one of the reasons why I started editing Wikipedia. Rare recently released this, which gives out plenty of unseen information. I have several links at hand on the game from interviews with Rare staff and Grant Kirkhope. I haven't touched the article since 2012, and some of the content is pretty old. I can definitely expand it and clean it up. JAGUAR  00:12, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

• I'm of two minds. (1) I don't see a preponderance of sources for Dream. There is the Retro Gamer, some Game Informer (2012) based on Kirkhope's blog, and the post-Rare Replay video, which generated a lot of coverage on/around December 22, 2015. There is little reception or influence (of Dream) to speak of, since it was an internal project and really is better known as the beginning of the Banjo-Kazooie project than as its own entity, so I'd favor a merge in those circumstances alone. (2) That said, if J were to remove all of the primary sources and squeeze every one of the aforementioned secondary sources until they were dry, we'd ostensibly be able to get several paragraphs on Dream gameplay and development content. The question, then, is whether all of that stands alone, or whether it needs to segue into BK, and in that case, would it be better off paraphrased to its essential details and placed in the original game or series articles? So J, go for it, but I'd be wary that a potential (and likely) outcome is that there just isn't enough secondary source breadth to justify a separate article on this—that would be a "reduce and merge" scenario with everything else potentially exporting to a Wikia, etc.  czar 02:50, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
• I don't believe that these two should be separate articles. @Jaguar:, please consider merging this article rather than expand it. I understand this was your first article, but seriously Project Dream can be talked about in Banjo Kazooie.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.127.75.241 (talk • contribs)
• Oppose merge - I think there's enough coverage from the Rare Replay reveal, like the Polygon source listed above. Its too bad we don't have enough to warrant something like a Reception section, but that's not necessarily required for a subject to have its own article, it's just a common path to it. I think it could be difficult getting it to GA as Jaguar aims to do, but I do think there's enough sources and content to warrant an article. Sergecross73 msg me 15:12, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

• I'm reopening the article's merger. The "Project Dream" article has only seven sources, and can easily be merged into one article. I have no idea why the page hasn't been merged yet. There also has to be a good explanation about why the article hasn't been merged yet. (Adamtb24) 23:49, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

@Adamtb24, that would be reverse logic: when proposing a merger, we discuss whether or not it should happen, not if it shouldn't. If there are only seven sources currently, why don't you try to expand the article? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 15:38, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

• I oppose the merger. The Project Dream article is well-written, and complete, in its own right. Merging the two would be extremely difficult, and unnecessary. As someone above said, "there's enough sources and content to warrant an article.". Rickraptor707 (talk) 07:57, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose. They're two different things. The original ideas and reveal of Dream did happen and do exist, they're distinctively different. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 15:38, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Banjo-Kazooie. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.next-generation.com/jsmid/previews/1922_2.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100323163045/http://uk.ign64.ign.com/articles/151/151922p1.html to http://uk.ign64.ign.com/articles/151/151922p1.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gameinformer.com/pviews/feb98/banjo/banjo.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:25, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

I accidentally pushed the enter button while I was typing the edit description in so I wasn't able to finish clarifying as to where I was coming from.

But anyway, I meant to say that I don't think the release date should be put under the "development"- it had less so to do with it being mentioned under the game being delayed so much as the section it was under in the first place. I mean when you get down to it, the game's release date really doesn't have anything to do with the development of the game itself, and in my opinion the way it's included at the very end of the section feels sort of weird and out-of-place. I feel like, if anything, the release date should be mentioned under a "release" section, along with the fact that it was delayed and maybe even the fact that it was first shown off at e3. But I've tried and failed to add that in the past, and in retrospect I don't think there's enough stuff in the article at the moment to justify/fill up an entire new "release" section. I still don't think that the date of release should be mentioned in the development section, though- maybe for now it could be in the first paragraph of "reception"- i.e. "Banjo-Kazooie was first released in*country* on *date* *month*, 1998 to positive critical reaction...(etc.) something along the lines of that, you know?? I'm perfectly willing and open for debate, so I would appreciate it if you threw in your thoughts on this query, Niwi3.
Thanks! TheDisneyGamer (talk) 05:09, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Usually, video game articles cover the history of a video game in a chronological order. If there is not enough information for a release section, it is perfectly fine to have the release date at the end of the development section, especially for old, non AAA games. If the game were accompanied by a strong marketing campaign, then putting the release date in a release or even reception section would make more sense, but that's not the case with Banjo-Kazooie. In my opinion, since the development section says the game was delayed, it makes much more sense to have the final release date there rather than have it in the reception section. --Niwi3 (talk) 10:51, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Banjo-Kazooie. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120208101018/http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/05/23/stop-n-swop-thing/ to http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/05/23/stop-n-swop-thing
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120914062240/http://www.ign.com/articles/2000/06/16/the-top-25-n64-games-of-all-time-6-10 to http://uk.ign64.ign.com/articles/080/080958p1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091026235401/http://uk.ign64.ign.com/articles/150/150422p1.html to http://uk.ign64.ign.com/articles/150/150422p1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713005227/http://uk.xboxlive.ign.com/articles/913/913011p1.html to http://uk.xboxlive.ign.com/articles/913/913011p1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081105170739/http://uk.xboxlive.ign.com/articles/911/911732p1.html to http://uk.xboxlive.ign.com/articles/911/911732p1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120110135611/http://uk.xboxlive.ign.com/articles/927/927117p1.html to http://uk.xboxlive.ign.com/articles/927/927117p1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:14, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Just wanted to let people watching this page know that when I rewrote Project Dream a few months ago I found some information that could be integrated here, like how Banjo was initially a side character and that it became a platformer because of Mario 64 and Conker. JOEBRO64 18:02, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Though I'm pretty sure they didn't sell well because of the popularity of the Sega Saturn and Dreamcast, but they do exist. MightyArms (talk) 00:56, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Update: I found an old N64 commercial for the Japanese release, and it lists its release date as December 6, 1998. So I'm gonna be bold and add it to the page. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moAW3Xc5j5E MightyArms (talk) 21:29, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

See my edit description. We don't add Japanese release dates to non-Japanese games. JOEBRO64 22:36, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

There is a move discussion in progress on

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Treasure Trove Cove. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 2#Treasure Trove Cove until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. MB 14:48, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

What's the point of that comparison? What does BK have to do with Disney, other than the fact that is made for all ages? I think that should be removed, because it is silly. --Bageense^(disc.) 16:24, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Because apparently (I cannot check the source right now) the developers explicitly stated that it was designed with Disney in mind. -- ferret (talk) 17:43, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Ferret, ok. Now, with your explanation, the sentence makes more sense. But still, other people may feel confused. For clarity, what if we change "designed" to "intended"? Banjo-Kazooie was intended to appeal to players of all ages in a similar vein to Walt Disney Animation Studios films. --Bageense^(disc.) 01:09, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Bageense and ferret. I have access to the source. Here is the direct quote:

Q: So what's inspired you during the making of the game? Films? Books? Mario 64?

A: We wanted to take a 3D world inspired by Mario 64 and combine it with the same kind of look we achieved with DKC on the SNES. Although they are aimed at a younger market, Disney films have a universal appeal. This is something we have tried to create with Banjo-Kazooie. We wanted the characters to primarily appeal to a younger audience but, at the same time, give them enough humour and attitude not to discourage older players.

I don't see how the current wording is confusing. The change from "designed" to "intended" makes it sound like Rare was unsuccessful in achieving that goal. However, they were successful, as the game got good reviews and one critic said the game was "Disney-esque". So I recommend not making any changes. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 14:02, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Tarkus. You also summed up my feelings about the word change. It was "designed" to be like Disney. That's the simple fact. -- ferret (talk) 14:48, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, ok then. --Bageense^(disc.) 23:54, 11 September 2021 (UTC)