Talk:Warhawk (1986 video game)

"Dubious" tags: Are these the same games?

Can someone please present some evidence that the game called "Warhawk" on the PS1 and PS3 are in fact conversions or at least based upon the 1986 Firebird game?

Given the time disparity, and the fact that Firebird's game was a £1.99 UK budget release, it's more reasonable to assume (in the absence of any supporting evidence) that they are unrelated games which just happened to have the same name.

Fourohfour 16:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... well, I've never actually played any of the games myself (I do plan to get the PS3 version, however), so I'm not sure. I just read the PS1 and PS3 articles and assumed all the information is correct.

Can you please provide a link to the articles in question if they're on the web? Thanks. Fourohfour 13:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

What? I'm talking about the Wikipedia articles for the PS1 and PS3 Warhawk games. They both mentioned the Commodrore 64 version so I assumed the information was correct. Mrmoocow 21:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Anyway, I'll do some research and find out. Mrmoocow 21:26, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Nothing concrete yet, however: Warhawk on Gamespot it is listed under 'Same Universe' as th PS version. Mrmoocow 21:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

That's *really* pushing things so far as evidence goes. Maybe they just assumed, maybe it was an oversight in categorisation, who knows?

Honestly, if the PS/PS3 versions genuinely were related to the original version, it should be relatively easy to find a few statements clearly indicating this from reputable sources- preferably from the company itself. Otherwise, I'd like to take the assertion out of all articles in which it appears. Fourohfour 13:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

This news story says:

“ Warhawk for the Playstation 3 is a remake of the original Warhawk video game that was released way back on the Commodore 64 (and again for the Playstation later on). ”

Mrmoocow 21:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I also came across this story which somewhat strengthens the case. I'm still wary because I haven't come across anything from Sony themselves that claim it's a remake, and it's possible that those sites are jumping to conclusions and/or repeating someone else's assumption.

To be honest, I probably wouldn't be making such a big deal of this, but for the fact that the original was never *that* famous a game; music aside, it's not one that gets masses of exposure, and it begs the question as to why Sony would remake it. Fourohfour 13:15, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Note: The Playstation 3 game should not be considered a remake of any of the games since the story/one-player mode was cut so they could concentrate on online multiplayer mode.Playstationdude 22:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

"Considering" something as such-and-such (e.g. a remake) is a can of worms open to personal interpretation. The only reliable solution is to take what the developers themselves claim, noting (e.g.) that "the developers claim that [SUCH AND SUCH]". Fourohfour 23:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

With the thematical differences, the difference in studios, difference in time, etc... It's very unlikely that 1986's Warhawk and 1996's Warhawk are related. One is a top-down shooter set in space by a now-defunct software developer, while the other is a 3D game focused on Earth developed by a totally different company and produced by a different company. According to the article on the publisher, Microprose most likely owns the rights to the Firebird edition of the game. They're still around, so... Cheers, Lanky ○ Yell ○ 20:17, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bluewarhawkship.gif

Image:Bluewarhawkship.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 03:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

War hawk

You are invited to participate in Talk:War hawk#Requested move 21 May 2019 about whether War hawk should be moved to Hawk (foreign policy). R2 (bleep) 16:26, 29 May 2019 (UTC)