Talk:Vehicles in GTA San Andreas: Difference between revisions
→Suggestions
(→Tables) |
|||
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
::Hmm, the Flash ''could'' go into '''2 Door''', but that's already crowded enough as it is unless we can make the columns longer (I'm not sure how and I'd rather not mess it up trying to find out), and I think the Flash is sufficiently fast and sleek to be counted as a sports car, especially considering it's one of the Wheel Arch Angels crowd, same goes with the rest. Following that train of thought, though, perhaps we could create a new category, '''Tuners''', for those cars? | ::Hmm, the Flash ''could'' go into '''2 Door''', but that's already crowded enough as it is unless we can make the columns longer (I'm not sure how and I'd rather not mess it up trying to find out), and I think the Flash is sufficiently fast and sleek to be counted as a sports car, especially considering it's one of the Wheel Arch Angels crowd, same goes with the rest. Following that train of thought, though, perhaps we could create a new category, '''Tuners''', for those cars? | ||
::< | ::<blockquote><small>"As for the other edits, '''Be Bold''' and hit the edit button."</small></blockquote> | ||
::I would, but it's kinda protected. ;) --[[User:MattyDienhoff|MattyDienhoff]] 15:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC) | ::I would, but it's kinda protected. ;) --[[User:MattyDienhoff|MattyDienhoff]] 15:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
| Line 72: | Line 72: | ||
::I'm going ahead with the other edits, but I'm still thinking about how to handle the first one. It seems the ''Elegy'', ''Flash'', ''Jester'', ''Sultan'' and ''Uranus'' are categorical orphans, as, like you said, they don't quite fit into '''Sports Cars''', but it seems a bit unfair to lump them in with the likes of the Manana and the Bravura in '''2 Doors''' instead. Here's an idea... | ::I'm going ahead with the other edits, but I'm still thinking about how to handle the first one. It seems the ''Elegy'', ''Flash'', ''Jester'', ''Sultan'' and ''Uranus'' are categorical orphans, as, like you said, they don't quite fit into '''Sports Cars''', but it seems a bit unfair to lump them in with the likes of the Manana and the Bravura in '''2 Doors''' instead. Here's an idea... | ||
:#Move ''Buffalo'' and ''Phoenix'' into '''Sports Cars'''. | :#Move ''Buffalo'' and ''Phoenix'' into '''Sports Cars'''. | ||
:#Move ''Clover'' and ''Sabre'' into '''2 Door'''. | :#Move ''Clover'' and ''Sabre'' into '''2 Door'''. | ||
| Line 78: | Line 79: | ||
::What do you think? --[[User:MattyDienhoff|MattyDienhoff]] 11:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC) | ::What do you think? --[[User:MattyDienhoff|MattyDienhoff]] 11:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
How about creating a ''Sport Coupe'' subcategorization, since it seems that cars like the [[Elegy]], which do not necessarily fall into either the ''Sports Car'' or ''Muscle Car'' designations, are better defined as 2-door sport coupes, since they are ''not'' 2-seaters like the sports cars, but do not have the engine to be classified as muscle cars. | How about creating a ''Sport Coupe'' subcategorization, since it seems that cars like the [[Elegy]], which do not necessarily fall into either the ''Sports Car'' or ''Muscle Car'' designations, are better defined as 2-door sport coupes, since they are ''not'' 2-seaters like the sports cars, but do not have the engine to be classified as muscle cars. This idea could then be applied to the creation of a ''Sport Sedan'' subcategory for cars such as the [[Sultan]]. What does everyone think? '''[[User:Eganio|Eganio]]<sup>''[[User talk:Eganio|Talk]]''</sup>''' 20:53, 11 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
:Smells of overcategorization to me, I'm afraid. I don't see the sense in creating two new categories ('''Sport Coupe''' and '''Sport Sedan''') for vehicles that could more easily fit into one category '''Tuners''', especially since ''Sport Sedan'' would only contain <u>one car</u>. I think we should just can '''Muscle Cars''' as it's a very subjective term and the line between it and 2 Doors is a very blurred one indeed. The Sabre and the Clover are considered muscle cars, but the Stallion isn't? | :Smells of overcategorization to me, I'm afraid. I don't see the sense in creating two new categories ('''Sport Coupe''' and '''Sport Sedan''') for vehicles that could more easily fit into one category '''Tuners''', especially since ''Sport Sedan'' would only contain <u>one car</u>. I think we should just can '''Muscle Cars''' as it's a very subjective term and the line between it and 2 Doors is a very blurred one indeed. The Sabre and the Clover are considered muscle cars, but the Stallion isn't? | ||
| Line 84: | Line 85: | ||
:Creating a new category, '''Tuners''', for the vehicles that can be modified at Wheel Arch Angels (vehicles which are generally higher performance than regular passenger cars but still not quite sports cars) makes the most sense, I think, and is more consistent with the thinking behind the '''Lowriders''' category, which is exclusively for vehicles that can be modified at Loco Low Co (hence the reason the Tahoma is listed there and not in 4 Door). --[[User:MattyDienhoff|MattyDienhoff]] 05:36, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | :Creating a new category, '''Tuners''', for the vehicles that can be modified at Wheel Arch Angels (vehicles which are generally higher performance than regular passenger cars but still not quite sports cars) makes the most sense, I think, and is more consistent with the thinking behind the '''Lowriders''' category, which is exclusively for vehicles that can be modified at Loco Low Co (hence the reason the Tahoma is listed there and not in 4 Door). --[[User:MattyDienhoff|MattyDienhoff]] 05:36, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
::Heh, point well taken. | ::Heh, point well taken. What you suggested makes sense. I also agree with you that the category ''Muscle Cars'' is defunct, as '''1)''' no one other than Americans (and maybe Aussies) use the term in any meaningful way, and '''2)''' there are cars in there that hardly fit the standards for qualifying as a mucle car, specifically the [[Elegy]], [[Flash]], [[Sultan]], [[Uranus]], and [[Jester]], leaving only a few entries. These I think should just be partitioned into their body type category, i.e. 2-door, etc. And as far as ''Sports Cars'' are concerned, as far as I understand the term, it refers to high performance 2-seaters, which excludes the [[Buffalo]] (and maybe the [[Phoenix]]?), so I would be cautious as to what I put in there. '''[[User:Eganio|Eganio]]<sup>''[[User talk:Eganio|Talk]]''</sup>''' 08:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
Is there a chart or guide on which vehicles bring the highest SexAppeal? --[[User:Funka!|Funka!]] 04:45, 14 October 2008 (UTC) | Is there a chart or guide on which vehicles bring the highest SexAppeal? --[[User:Funka!|Funka!]] 04:45, 14 October 2008 (UTC) | ||
| Line 103: | Line 104: | ||
:Please place replies at the end of a section. No one will be reading recent replies from the top.--'''[[User:Spaceeinstein|Spaceeinstein]]''' 01:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC) | :Please place replies at the end of a section. No one will be reading recent replies from the top.--'''[[User:Spaceeinstein|Spaceeinstein]]''' 01:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
Get rid of the Andromada and the tram [[User:Saintsrow2fan2010|Saintsrow2fan2010]] 02:19, July 6, 2010 (UTC) | |||