Talk:Miscellany of Bender's Game

Necessary?
Is the "lesbian fetish" point necessary? Isn't that more of a personal thing than general trivia? -- the preceding unsigned comment was written by Mine-Me.
 * I agree, I felt too it was a little over the top. Not because I am going to censor "bad words" (as I don't believe in censorship), but because it seems like a rather speculative and subjective thing.  My thought was that the writers just wanted her seducing to take a step further, for the comedy value of it, rather than satisfying anything one sexually.  In addition, to those of the fans who wanted it are probably a minority.  But I doubt it was the writers' intend to satisfy them, and it is more a comedy feature.  You know, humour! --SvipTalk 20:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe it was Anarchy Balsac who put it up. We'll wait for his thoughts first I guess. Another wonder I had was the rumour point. I see how it's relevant, but I also don't think it is relevant (if that makes sense). -Mini-Me 22:22, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It was the only way I could think of to describe it. Not all straight men think lesbians are attractive, so it is important to draw a distinction. As for the speculation part, well any explanation of it is speculative, however, my theory is heavily supported by the commentary where one of the commentators said, "Your welcome fans" during that very part.Anarchy Balsac 06:11, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * That does not sound to me like a complete prove. It could be the commentator just thinking of it as he watches it, but it was the original intend of the scene.  I think his reference is more about the sexual undertones and the fact that something happens, that is what the fans should appreciate.  But who knows?  If anything, at least make it more speculative, so it doesn't appear as "truth". --SvipTalk 11:23, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * There's also the fact that Farnsworth and Bender both made comments along the lines of said fans. So any other possibility is extremely unlikely. I mean are you going to tell me that the scene, how it reflects the wishes of certain fans, the commentary by Claudia Catz, and the characters' own remarks are all a coincidence? I personally don't care about the scene, but the facts point to what was posted. And I do care about the facts.Anarchy Balsac 20:50, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

'''

Bender's Game = Ender's Game?
Given the writers' tendency to make really "nerdy" allusions to general science and science fiction, I think it's pretty likely the title is a reference to Ender's Game, a sci-fi novel by Orson Scott Card which won the Nebula and Hugo award's in 85 and 86, respectively. I don't really know how to go about proving that, just that from the audio commentary on the seasons David X. Cohen seems to read a lot of science fiction and often makes references to things from it. Granted it could just be describing the fact that it's Bender's game of D&D, but I can't think of any episodes or movies where the title was so bland and purely descriptive. They're usually a play on something. -- the preceding unsigned comment was written by Bignerd2183‎.
 * Yes, and it is already mentioned in the infobox in the article itself. --SvipTalk 13:08, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * SILENCE! I concur. I hadn't even thought of this until one of my non-nerdy friends pointed it out. Then I felt dumb. --Buddy 13:48, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

New sections for D&D and fantasy references?
Okay this article is obviously lacking as we don't have these things listed and there are a lot of them in this film. Should we create new sections for these things or just lump them in with the existing ones? I think there's enough of them to warrant seperate sections.Anarchy Balsac 19:50, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

$632.14?
OK, so, in the beginning of Bender's Game, when the crew is getting dark matter, the total is $632.14, with one ball $9.99. but I did the math, and $632.14 divided by $9.99 is 63.277277277277277277277277277277 dark matter balls. Unless it counts taxes, i find this a goof. Chris of the Futurama 19:30, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I assume you're questioning how one of Nibbler's turds can bring the tank up to the 1/8th notch on the fuel gauge? Nibbler's droppings may be denser than the station's units. I realize the balls all come from Nibblonians, but Mom Corp may make the balls lighter in order to sell more... or something. It could also be a "lazy" gas tank, much like what is found on many older vehicles. -Mini-Me 05:10, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Or she could just want to rip people off like she did with the price of turds. Chris of the Futurama 16:17, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Waltazar/Walt
If someone calls "Benjamin" "Ben" is it really a mistake? I mean, it could've been, but we could also give them the benefit of the doubt. --Buddy 03:53, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, that's sort of a goof and breaking the fourth wall by calling a Cornwood character by the real universe's name, so, if you don't think it's a goof, it could be in the trivia for forth wall breaking maybe? Chris of the Futurama 03:57, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Buddy, you call Benjamin Ben in modern times, you think it was common to give people nicknames like we do back in the middle ages? And even a man of such high stature as Waltazar must have to be second in command under Momon?  Watch Lord of the Rings, only people giving nicknames to each other are the hobbits, and even they are much more clever than just a small contraction.  This goof is most likely a slip due to what is normally his name.  The more that has passed since I wrote the additional to the goof, the less and less I believe it to be a nickname, and more for it to be an actual goof.  It doesn't make sense for characters to have nicknames like that in the worlds Cornwood parodies. --SvipTalk 13:11, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm just sayin'! --Buddy 13:30, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Nibbler coming back
Is it possible that Nibbler came back in the opening sequence? I mean, that makes more sense than just getting him from no where. -- Chris of the Futurama 21:43, 11 January 2009 (UTC)