Talk:Last Prism

Trivia
this trivia section is awful. it's just a prism, and the usage of a prism is common knowledge. the tooltip MIGHT be a league reference but it's not confirmed. touhou would be more likely due to the huge graphical similarities with Master Spark. neither one has overwhelming proof though, so stop adding this stuff in unless Red confirms it himself. holy shit why is there so many league fanboys and touhou kids, leave this game alone

in the meantime, here's the old trivia section --Ancientpowerer (talk) 23:12, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The item itself, being a drop from the Moon Lord, is most likely a reference to Pink Floyd's album "Dark Side of the Moon", which features a prism on its cover.
 * The tooltip is likely a reference to the popular MOBA game League of Legends character Vel'Koz, whose ultimate ability is named "Lifeform Disintegration Ray".
 * The item could also be a reference to the Touhou Franchise's Marisa Kirisame, who fires a rainbow-colored beam of light called the "Master Spark." League of Legends has a spinoff character of her named Lux with an ultimate skill called "Final Spark" which does much the same thing. The fact that the Master Spark drains all of the magical power from its caster could also be a joke at the Last Prism's high mana cost.

You missed the Kamen Rider W one.


 * The attack animation and name might refer to Kamen Rider W (Double) CycloneJokerExtreme's finisher "Prism Break: Final Illusion", which is often depicted by a series of colorful beams that merge into a strong pure light beam.

considering how some of the Beetle Armors looks like Kamen Rider itself... I'd not be surprised.

Trivia policy
The wiki's Style Guide has clearly delineated rules to determine what is or isn't valid for a trivia section. Basically, if you're contending that something is a pop culture reference, you need a clear and obvious source directly from the developers that can be referenced and linked to, or it isn't valid. If all you have to go on is a "may" then it's not a reference, as far as this wiki is concerned.

As an additional warning, it is not acceptable to incite others in edit summaries to continue acting against wiki policy without discussion. Policy is influenced by discussion, not by raw acts of defiance. This is essentially vandalism and will be treated as such in the future. Gearzein (talk) 06:14, 6 July 2015 (UTC)


 * The Vel'Koz reference could certainly be considered undeniable, as it is extremely obvious and worded almost identically to the flavor text, only differing in that the Prism mentions it's rainbow colors. There's a lot of interesting trivia about the game which is not directly confirmed by the developers, and a considerable amount of it appears on this wiki, I don't see why this should be any different at least in the case of the one definitive reference mentioned.Yakri (talk) 06:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Most of that information is left over from a time when we were much shorter on hands, and is ultimately either sourced or removed when it's found. There are a lot of interesting discoveries in the game and a lot of connections that can be made through player observation, but if every half-boiled piece of player speculation were added to a page then the trivia section would grow larger than the main page text- this only isn't the case here because the page's single paragraph is already inflated by dubiously useful mathematical extrapolation and personal suggestion. Eventually this page will have to be rewritten regardless, but for the moment the trivia section is cluttered and obtrusive, and quite frankly, the insistence on continually adding and expanding these points in spite of stated policy is frustrating, not just to myself but to other editors and readers.
 * That said, if an inspiration is really that obvious in this case, it shouldn't be difficult to have the developers confirm it. And, if it's confirmed to have been inspired by a certain source, there's no point to encouraging others to continue adding their own personal interpretations. A single, clean point at the end of the section would serve everyone's ends. Gearzein (talk) 06:55, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * We do have an allowance in the trivia rules for "undeniable" items, which I think may be what Yakri is referring to. "Disintegration beams" are common enough in fantasy/sci-fi that I will have to say the reference here to that particular game falls into the realm of plausible deniability. Not that the reference definitely isn't true -- it's possible, but for now it's far from undeniable. You could attempt to ask a developer at the forum to weigh in. They are sometimes eager to confirm when someone figures out a reference they threw in (but sometimes they're not, so don't hold too high of a hope). Equazcion  ( talk ) 07:13, 6 Jul 2015 (UTC)
 * What exactly does it take to be undeniable then? The flavor text for an item has almost identical wording (Lifeform Disintegration Ray vs Lifeform Disintegration Rainbow) and the single word of difference appears to be a play on the last word in the league champion ability (the first part of the word rainbow sounds the same as ray). The hero in question is an eldritch horror in the love craftian style, and the Last Prism is dropped by. . . Cthulhu. Vel'Koz also has a skin in which he shoots a beam of light instead of a dark beam, and appears to be a reference to an alien race from starcraft (alien invasion is part of the moon lord event). Additionally if you search for lifeform disintegration or lifeform disintegration ray and exclude results mentioning league, lol, or vel'koz, all that comes up is some league mentions that slipped through, this wikipedia (last prism) and an extremely unknown death metal band with a song called Lifeform disintegration ray. It appears to be a phrase that was exclusive to league of legends up to this point. If that's not confirmed enough the style guide should probably just remove the "undeniable" evidence option and consider it covered under the mention of obvious references; like if a literal spartain armor suit was added. Yakri (talk) 07:32, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

An undeniable reference would be "Get over here!" from the Grappling Hook tooltip, "Oh myyyy" from George's Tuxedo, the appearance of the Karate Tortoise costume, Space Creature costume, and the Creeper costume, to name a few. Listing similarities doesn't prove the point. There is nothing terribly unique about the term "disintegration ray", nor the weapon's animation, that we can use to say the developers didn't come up with them from thin air or from something else they saw. In the end I suppose it's a subjective matter, but the fact that so many people have come and put other such items on this page claiming a reference to others things would seem to indicate that the reference you point to isn't as obvious as you think (even if it's true -- we just, again, can't tell for sure based on the info we have). Equazcion ( talk ) 07:48, 6 Jul 2015 (UTC)
 * There is something unique about the term Lifeform Disintegration ray. Namely that it existed exactly one place of any note before it came up in terraria, and that other place is a hugely popular MOBA. The specific phrasing is actually quite unique, very similar to the grappling hook reference. While of course it is always possible that the people behind league, Terraria, and one random death metal band maybe 3000 people have heard of, could all have come up with the phrasing individually and no one else ever has, it's just as likely that the reference in the grappling hook tooltip was just a coincidental in joke.Yakri (talk) 09:01, 6 July 2015 (UTC)


 * That being said, the Last Prism's reference to Pink Floyd is undeniable. The inclusion of Plantera has demonstrated that the Terraria development team is no stranger to musical references, and the cover art for Dark Side of the Moon is legendary. Otherwise, there are few logical reasons for a prism as a weapon that drops from the lord of the moon. Faerdin (talk) 04:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * It's not possible for both claims to be undeniable, and yet everyone seems to believe their pet theory is obvious- but the prevalence of these theories means that all of them are very deniable. There's no logical reason for a giant meaty wall to drop an assault rifle either, but it happens. Again, conjecture like this has to be sourced- it's only undeniable if it is literally exactly taken from another source, nearly to the extent of copyright infringement. Otherwise, it needs to be sourced.
 * As a further warning, the page is still open to registered users as a show of good faith, but it's incredibly bad form to continue adding contested claims to the page while a discussion on the points of contention is still ongoing. Your strong insistence is not evidence enough for inclusion. Gearzein (talk) 04:56, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I just wanted to add that the only similarity between the Pink Floyd cover and this weapon is that they're both prisms, doing what prisms do: dispersing white light into multiple colored rays. The weapon and album cover both show this occurring, but many other works have as well -- making for exactly the kind of "reference" claim we must treat as highly dubious. Once you accept that, the presence of "moon" in both could be coincidental. Again this isn't to say an intended reference isn't plausibe &mdash; but its far from the 'sure thing' we hold as the standard here. Wiki articles would be mostly lists of "references" if we did differently. Equazcion  ( talk ) 06:43, 7 Jul 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd just like to point out that those two references could easily both be undeniably true with no contradiction, as one is a tooltip and the other is in the items appearance, although the whole, "it's a prism therefore it's a reference to an album cover with a prism," thing is pretty damn weak. ". . . but the prevalence of these theories means that all of them are very deniable." See, the thing is is that that makes no logical sense at all. There are tons of things that exist in our day to day lives which, though undeniable pillars of fact, are hotly contested for a wide variety of ridiculous reasons. Also I'd like to reiterate that although it's a big universe and nothing is impossible, identically repeating the name of a well known video game characters ultimate ability in the flavor text of an item, when said exact phrase is extremely uncommon to the point of essentially existing no where else, is a bit of a stretch.Yakri (talk) 10:38, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, but there's a mountain of difference between lunatics distorting basic realities, and holding the simultaneous contention that something is taken exactly and undeniably from one source while also being a mishmash of collected pieces referring to several other vaguely similar ideas. My point is that any room left to contest such a point undermines its undeniability, and it's hard to make the claim that a matter of perception is undeniable when everyone else sees something different. Essentially, this claim is "just as good" as everyone else's- lifeform and disintegration aren't hard words to learn, and are both commonly associated with science fiction, specifically the pulpy kind where mysterious green men come from the moon to shoot people with ray guns. This genre has had influence on Terraria even before Martian Madness was added and had been directly referenced in at least one case. This particular combination of words is only dubiously notable, because it's about as common as a cook saying the phrase "chicken knife"- it'd be more probable as a reference if they weren't words already commonly used when dealing with that subject matter.

Again, though, having this argument is fruitless. I'm not debating whether or not it's the case, I'm telling you why it's been removed and what you (or any other user, for that matter) can do to prove me wrong. It's not terribly hard to make a post on the forums or send a PM to ask a question. Gearzein (talk) 00:36, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
 * That's entirely incorrect; the claim has a strong basis and the phrase is actually about as common as a cook saying, "damn, I've gone and burnt the tentacle monster salad again!" It's a quote in the flavor text, not a perception. Yakri (talk) 18:42, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * That's not analogous. A cook using "monster" to refer to a salad is rather unexpected, but a scifi programmer (especially one with a penchant for the facetious) might reasonably use terms like "lifeform" and "disintegrator" when cooking up names for a fantasy projectile. Gearzein isn't saying the phrase is common, but that the individual terms would be common enough in this situation for the phrase to possibly be original. Equazcion  ( talk ) 21:25, 12 Jul 2015 (UTC)

Notes vs Trivia
"Trivia should not describe an item's function, interesting things that can be done with it, or ways it might malfunction in the game. Those items may belong in a Notes or Tips section."

I don't have any problem inherently with nifty facts about an item going in the trivia section, but the style guide appears to explicitly relegate such comments to notes or tips sections.Yakri (talk) 07:39, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The items you're referring to don't do any of the above. They merely analyze which weapon can achieve a higher stat. The spirit of these rules is to keep Notes sections confined to crucial gameplay information (info players need in order to understand how an item works), whereas your items seems more like an interesting statistical analysis. Your first item could be construed as an attempt to help players decide between two weapons, and if that's the case, I'd perhaps re-word it and place it under "Tips" (but still not Notes). As for your second item, if the point of that is indeed to conclude that the weapon provides the "highest damage in the game", that's precisely the type of statistical record that should stay in Trivia. Equazcion  ( talk ) 08:03, 6 Jul 2015 (UTC)

DPS
Don't know who did the dps test, I have reached 10000 + dps on single target on the SDMG, and according to my calculations about 13000 is possible without demon heart, crystal bullets or nebula buffs.The last prism seems to be able to reach 20000 if the information on the wiki and my calculations are correct. With Crystal Bullets SDMG can do a theoretic max dps that goes over 30,000, same applies for the Last Prism used with Nebula buffs. Also, the test dummy thing is ridiculous, anyone can line up a thousand dummies with a piercing weapon and get a high dps.49.50.200.38 12:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Damage tests were done using the final armor for each type (ranged and magic) respectively, with every possible dps increasing accessory, +4% damage on all accessories, all possible buffs (that are actually accessible by a single player), and best possible weapon prefixes. The point about piercing weapons isn't really correct; some piercing weapons lose damage over more targets, are less accurate, etc. The Last Prism gets particularly insane DPS because it has perfect accuracy for its entire range, doesn't lose damage on piercing, and has by far the highest damage, let alone out of other weapons with those properties. I retested with crystal bullets, but even with maximum abuse of their backsplash, which you can't actually pull off vs real enemies, single targets only hit about 18k dps, 20k if you get a string of lucky crits for a bit. Yakri (talk) 10:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)