You should be able to see that I have started a table for all the vehicles in San Andreas. There are a few things I'd like to talk over before we go any further.
Firstly, should we have separate tables (or parts of the table) for different types of vehicles, such as sports cars and industrial vehicles? It is a good way of making things easy to find. But if we do, the page will still be quite cluttered (compared to the simple list we had before).
Secondly, do we need a description field for every vehicle? I was thinking of a single sentence such as "The fastest sports car in the game, available when you get all-gold at Driving School". If we do not separate into types then we definitely need descriptions. Also bear in mind that
Thirdly, do we even need a table? We could just have a few lists for each type of vehicle - this is the simplest and tydiest suggestion, but means we can't have any thumbnails or description. But then again, do we even need those? This is meant to be a list of vehicles. But on the other hand, if all we want is an alphabetical list, that's what a Category is for.
So we have four main choices: 1) Lists sorted into types, 2) Tables in types, 4) Tables in types with descriptions, 3) Single table with descriptions
- IMO first of all we should definitely have categories, e.g. Bikes, Trucks, Sports Cars, Family Cars etc. Secondly, I don't think descriptions and thumbnails are particularly necessary, but I guess they would be useful to some, thumbnails more than descriptions anyway. A single long table though is a definite no-no.--Chris 21:45, 7 May 2007 (BST)
- You'd rather have a table with no thumbnails or descriptions then? Howabout running the lists horizontally, with one cell for each type of vehicle - allows for easy finding of vehicles and takes up a lot less space. For example:
|Sports Cars||Banshee | Bullet | Cheetah | Comet | Hotknife | Hotring Racer | Infernus | Super GT | Turismo | ZR-350 | Euros|
- As long as you keep the vertical list alphabetical its great. The horizontal one is just retarded for this purpose. Font could be bigger for table heading though. --Chris 22:15, 7 May 2007 (BST)
--MattyDienhoff 15:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC) Okay I've implemented the 2nd one of those tables. None of the vehicles have links yet, and the lists are not yet alphabeticalised. Also need to make sure all SAVehicles are actually listed and spelt correctly.Xenon (?) 22:59, 7 May 2007 (BST)
--Saintsrow2fan2010 02:17, July 6, 2010 (UTC) Do we need the tram on the table because you can never obtain it so it is only a texture. Where is the Jetpack or the Parachute
Hey fellas, a few suggestions.
- Move Elegy, Flash, Jester, Sultan and Uranus from Muscle Cars to Sports Cars. These vehicles aren't muscle cars by any definition.
- Move Perennial, Regina, Solair and Stratum from SUV to 4 Door.
- Move Moonbeam from SUV to Vans.
- Rename SUV to the more catch-all 4WD/Utility.
- Finally, move Bobcat, Yosemite, Sadler and Walton from Vans to 4WD/Utility
--MattyDienhoff 08:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- They're all pretty good, although I dont think the Flash etc should really be defined as sports cars, since they aren't awesome and fast and convertible (which is more the purpose of that section). Perhaps rename muscle cars to something else that defines small powerful cars? As for the other edits, Be Bold and hit the edit button. Thanks for discussing them here first, it's annoying when people totally reorganise things without asking. Gboyers talk 11:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- 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?
"As for the other edits, Be Bold and hit the edit button."
- I would, but it's kinda protected. ;) --MattyDienhoff 15:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- That was to stop people messing it up every day. It isn't protected now, and so long as people ASK before they make changes, it can stay that way. Gboyers talk 16:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- 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 Clover and Sabre into 2 Door.
- Rename Muscle Cars to Tuners, to accomodate the vehicles modifiable at Wheel Arch Angels.
- What do you think? --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. This idea could then be applied to the creation of a Sport Sedan subcategory for cars such as the Sultan. What does everyone think? EganioTalk 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 one car. 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?
- 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). --MattyDienhoff 05:36, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
- 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. EganioTalk 08:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Is there a chart or guide on which vehicles bring the highest SexAppeal? --Funka! 04:45, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Suggestion here: Where it has the Pony (or Rumpo, cbf pressing back to check), it simply mentions the off-road wheels, and not the "fully sick sound system" (a couple of speakers), in the back of the van. That's why i kept it lol.
Ess-Tee 06:08, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
hey got some ideas you might like:
2. add RC Cam to RC Vehicles
- Please place replies at the end of a section. No one will be reading recent replies from the top.--Spaceeinstein 01:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Get rid of the tram Saintsrow2fan2010 02:19, July 6, 2010 (UTC)
- In this game, a vehicle is a valid model in the "cars" section of an IDE file. We should use this as the definition.--spaceeinstein 12:49, August 13, 2010 (UTC)
Combine Planes & Helicopters to Aircraft and Include Brown Streak, Freight and Tram into a Trains Column
Bikes and Pushbikes
The Bikes and Pushbikes should be in seperate colums
Should the class "Fun" be changed to something more realistic like "Novelty"? I think Novelty sounds good and would make more sense than just "fun." Russelnorthrop 23:03, July 1, 2011 (UTC)