Talk:Zero Point Energy Field Manipulator
|
This is the talk page for Zero Point Energy Field Manipulator. Click here to start a new topic. |  |
|---|---|---|
This page is reserved for discussion about the article itself, not for discussions about the subject. |
Contents
Template[edit]
needs to be added to the resistance weapons group on the template...Capt Jim 05:23, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Inventor?[edit]
Is there any canon reference to the inventor of the gravity gun? I assume it was Kleiner or Dr. Vance, or a collaboration? 76.10.185.36 09:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
View model[edit]
Shouldn't there be a photo of the view model for the regular Gravity Gun? There's one for the charged gun, why not the regular one? the cake is a lie 02:51, October 4, 2009 (UTC)DiceRoller
To do[edit]
- Add leak info about the weapon's background.
- Some rtb info.
- Prima guide info.
- Pics. Klow 17:56, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Proposal to remove the fan-made worldmodel imagery[edit]
The article shows the fan-made old gravity gun worldmodel which was created for the Megapatch project for the leak.
https://combineoverwiki.net/wiki/File:Physcannon_world_early_1.png
https://combineoverwiki.net/wiki/File:Physcannon_world_early_2.png
I propose removing it from the article because in my opinion, it doesn't serve to educate the reader on the matter of cut content very well.
The model was made from imagination, by lumping together pieces of the viewmodel and reusing bits of the texture and then adding a few bits from the retail scanner texture (!).
There is no proof that the worldmodel would have looked like that, and it may otherwise create the wrong impression that there was such model at some point or that we have access to one, or info on one.
The source field in the files says it comes from repository leak and HL2 Beta website, but it doesn't really.
The texture for it (the reused viewmodel one) is from the 2003 leak and the form of it was based on imagination, it didn't come from some trailer shot or something.
Coincidentally, I am the author of the model (Cvoxalury). I can certainly verify my sources for when I was making it and how I intended it to match the aesthetics (and ugliness) of the original - but never intended for it to be known as "fan port" or recognised as the definitive worldmodel.
All in all, the viewmodel imagery should definitely stay - it is authentic, we know it now - the worldmodel however is anything but authentic. And it's not a "port" of anything (what does that even mean?) 109.230.141.22 18:38, 18 August 2021 (MSK)
- While you've already removed the images, I agree that, in this particular instance, the screenshots of this fanmade model were not illustrating elements that give readers a better view or insight into something that could not be adequately demonstrated with the available materials, rather instead focusing on the parts that had to be created from conjecture. Marphy (talk) 01:35, 28 August 2021 (MSK)
