Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Shortcut: WT:VG
Gamepad.svg WikiProject
Video games
Main page talk
Archives
1 - 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108
Threads older than 10 days may
be archived by MiszaBot II.
Manual of style
Article guidelines talk
Templates talk
Sources talk
Departments
Assessment talk
Reference library talk
  Print archive talk
Newsletter talk
  Current issue Draft
Articles
Article alerts talk
Pages for deletion talk
New pages talk
Article requests talk
Essential articles talk
Most popular articles talk
Featured content talk
Good content talk
Recognized content talk

viewtalkeditchanges

Brave Frontier[edit]

Well I am having a problem regarding the article I created, which is Brave Frontier. IT seems that the page I wrote lacks a lot of things especially first party sources and anything else. If someone can cover this thoroughly please do.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackgaia02 (talkcontribs) 13:40, 30 August 2014‎ (UTC)

Budget range re-released date in Infobox VG[edit]

Hi, everybody. Many titles were re-released under Budget range labels (e.g. Greatest Hits), I noticed much (if not all) of FAs didn't list these releases dates in {{Infobox video game}}. So, shall (or couldn't) I list them in articles? --D2F0F5 05:55, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, we don't note re-released like that in the infobox. I would say that if third-party, non-vendor sources note the release date, it should be okay to add in prose (typically under Release, if not, under Development). But if no one else notes this, it might just be better to categorize it so that a reader can find their way to, for example, that greatest hits page. --MASEM (t) 06:19, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
In my experience it isn't common for the date of that budget-line appointment to even be available on the Internet. Typically you just see that the game is on the list. Tezero (talk) 15:34, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Destiny: Single-player or Multiplayer[edit]

Internet Connection is always required for the entire game. But at the same time it has a single-player campaign which you are allowed to play by your own or by co-op. Do we count that as a multiplayer exclusive? Some conflicts is happening in that page. AdrianGamer (talk) 07:19, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Of course not. That doesn't make any sense. --Mika1h (talk) 15:21, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
The infobox template makes it clear what should be in the field. Single Player, Multiplayer or both of them, nothing else, including the explanatory note that I removed earlier. - X201 (talk) 15:43, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Mika1h, you posted this on the Destiny Talk page yourself: "From what I gathered reading those articles and seeing some YouTube videos, the game is single player in the same vein as other MMOs in that you can solo it, but there are still other people running around on the same server. That would make it multiplayer-only game, no matter what Bungie claims. --Mika1h (talk) 23:57, 9 September 2014 (UTC)". Bungie's vague wording about "game could played solo" doesn't change the fact of what you said earlier. In your own words, "there are still other people running around the same server. That would make it multiplayer-only game no matter what Bungie claims." As I mentioned in an earlier post, Destiny was never billed as a single-player game and more like an MMORPG.Dibol (talk) 20:34, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
A required internet connection doesn't make a game multiplayer automatically... Sergecross73 msg me 17:32, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Agreed, we don't treat Diablo 3, Driver: San Francisco, or Silent Hunter 5: Battle of the Atlantic as multiplayer only because of Always-on DRM so I don't see why this should be any different.--76.65.41.36 (talk) 21:29, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

I've left a note with User:Dibol concerning the infobox and notified them of this section, after the same edits was made to Diablo 3 and multiple other articles. -- ferret (talk) 00:27, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Uh, except Destiny was never billed as a single-player game. If you're required to be online, you're not exactly playing the game by yourself, especially with the Always-on DRM. If someone were to apply that type of logic, you might as well label every MMO as Single Player or multiplayer.Dibol (talk) 00:38, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Addendum: The way I'm seeing this is "Single-player" means "being able to play by yourself, no strings attached." The problem is certain games with Always-on DRM heavily conflicts with this. I'm proposing that we have have an extra heading stating whether or not a video game has DRM. The current mode is VERY unhelpful if someone is on the fence about buying a video game or not. As it stands with games like The Crew Diablo III and StarCraft 2, no one can play single-player out of the box without an internet connection, despite saying "this could be played single-player." Dibol (talk) 00:46, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
The problem, then, is that your understanding in fundamentally wrong. The player section is just meant to designate whether its played "alone" or "with others". It's not commentary on DRM or required internet connections. Your other comments about "not being helpful" aren't really a concern either; any games with noteworthy or obtrusive DRM/internet requirements are going to have sourced information in the article's prose, which would be a lot more easy to understand than what you're suggesting. Basically, no one's objecting to the information you're adding, they're just objecting to where you're putting it. Just like it doesn't belong in the "genre" or "release date" sections either. Sergecross73 msg me 01:05, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Also requiring an Internet connection does not suddenly mean that the game does not have a single player mode. The fact that you need an Internet connection to play Diablo 3 does not suddenly mean that you are not playing the game alone. In other words, an active Internet connection is not a second player by any definition.--76.65.41.36 (talk) 01:45, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
I noticed that the user in question decided to remove single player entirely from the Infobox. I've readded it but we should keep an eye on this user since I can see no way based on this discussion that they could have thought that the removal was acceptable.--76.65.41.36 (talk) 02:28, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
"From what I gathered reading those articles and seeing some YouTube videos, the game is single player in the same vein as other MMOs in that you can solo it, but there are still other people running around on the same server. That would make it multiplayer-only game, no matter what Bungie claims. --Mika1h (talk) 23:57, 9 September 2014 (UTC)" - Dibol (talk) 04:05, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Again, it's fine to put it in the article, just put it somewhere else. Not in the single/multi-player field. Sergecross73 msg me 22:38, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Suggest a few eyes on Minecraft/Mojang/Notch[edit]

MS is rumored to be buying Mojang for $2B. As such, I expect Minecraft, Mojang, and Notch's article to be targets of vandalism over the next few days. --MASEM (t) 22:28, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

I have added the news to the Mojang article, but only as being reported. Chambr (talk) 22:40, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

TMNT page move[edit]

I put a request to move Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1989 video game) to Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (NES game), since that game and the arcade game were both released in 1989. Jonny2x4 (talk) 01:47, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Agatha Christie FAR[edit]

Can we get some input here regarding Agatha Christie: And Then There Were None's FA status? I've raised some pretty major issues there and would appreciate input from the project about whether it should be delisted. Pinging Tezero and JimmyBlackwing: the c/e is over but I think there are still major problems there. CR4ZE (tc) 06:58, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

CR4ZE, I agree that the article's still in need of major work to rightly merit FA status - as said on the FAR page, I'd prefer the copyedit to have been done last as a lot of the content will need to be changed - but keep/demote votes aren't supposed to come until the FAR becomes an FARC. Tezero (talk) 07:46, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Articles move to FARC when there's no consensus to keep or delist at FAR, so if we reach consensus here we won't need to move to the third step. Wuzh, the only active major contributor, indicated here that they gave up trying to improve it, so unless somebody else besides the GOCE editor steps in and cleans it up, it isn't likely that the content will change enough to keep it. CR4ZE (tc) 08:40, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Is this source usable?[edit]

I have an interview here with producer David Mulich at GameStakers. The site itself takes user contributions which is a downside, but this is an interview in which Mulich has deliberately mentioned some items of information as a result of e-mail correspondence with myself. Is it usable or not? Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 20:33, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Link, please. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  21:26, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Me being derp Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 21:47, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Interviews are typically considered reliable unless there's a reason to actively believe otherwise. In what areas does the site take "user contributions"? I've had interviews hosted on fansites and even forums make it into FAs. Tezero (talk) 22:12, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Yea, the relevant policy is WP:ABOUTSELF, which is pretty much common sense; unless there are suspicions that the interviews may be fake or the interviewee being untruthful, then it's fine as a factual primary source. ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  23:04, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
@Tezero, the about page says "To write a review for a game, no rank is necessary, just an account which is free! Once the review is submitted, it is checked to make sure quality is present and then it is made public.", so there is some kind of oversight. @Salvidrim! Thanks for the info. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 22:09, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

The video game release regions are not appropriate[edit]

Okay, this has been bothering me for a loooooooooong time, but as no body else has brought this up (kidding me guys?) I created an account just to do this. As you know, the vgrelease template is separated into four regions, Japan, North America, Europe and Australasia.

This is a major problem because Europe and North America are CONTINENTS, with DIFFERENT countries speaking DIFFERENT languages and obviously their video game release dates are DIFFERENT. Treating Europe as if it was one country is nonsense, or are you telling me that the English, French, German, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, Polish, Romanian, Greek, Turkish, Ukrainian, Russian, Norwegian, Danish, Finnish, Swedish, Belgian, Hungarian, Slovakian, Croatian video games where all released on Exactly the same date? Or the same with American (I mean the USA here), Canadian, Mexican, Cuban and Jamaican release dates?

See what I mean here?

This is DISCRIMINATORY and treating the USA and UK as if they represent their entire continents.

Its equivalent to changing the "Japan" region to "Asia", as if it was appropriate

See what I mean?

I propose changing "North America" to "United States" and "Europe" to "United Kingdom" to solve this issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stranger with no soul (talkcontribs) 00:02, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

We are more interested in the first English release date (save for Japan, which is a significant country where many video games originate from), so the North American release and the European release dates make the most sense. It is not discriminatory because this is how most sites already report release dates. --MASEM (t) 00:21, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Actually WP:VG/DATE states that Japan should be treated the same as other non-English countries. --Mika1h (talk) 00:30, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
There's also a {{vgrelease new}} template, which allows more flexible customization for regional releases since it accepts all ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 codes, in the case where it is absolutely necessary (however in not all cases should this actually be done). Alternatively, additional countries can be manually entered using {{vgrelease}} anyway, for example:
  • ABK December 35, 2017
is displayed using {{vgrelease|[[Abkhazia|ABK]]|December 35, 2017}}. However, keep in mind that neither of these two is an excuse to add 70 different country release dates to game infoboxes. --benlisquareTCE 02:49, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Additionally, the release regions are based on the PAL/NTSC regions of yore, as seen here- File:PAL-NTSC-SECAM.svg. Video games from NTSC regions (NA) could not be played in PAL regions (EU) or NTSC-J regions (JP). Australia/Australasia isn't it's own region, it's just another PAL area. With the advent of digital games, they still continued to be region-locked into those areas, so you couldn't play NTSC games on a PAL PS3. Nowadays, games on Steam or PSN are region-locked to specific countries, so the PAL/NTSC divide doesn't matter so much. Instead, we just say "what was the first release in NA? in EU? in JP?" regardless of language, and leave it at that; just like we say "what was the first PAL release?" regardless of language. If the first PAL/EU release was in France, then that's the date. I don't know why you think we're using the UK as the standard for Europe. --PresN 05:47, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Copyeditors wanted for Fez[edit]

JimmyBlackwing has expressed disapproval at the state of this article's prose. I thought it was good enough after a few fixes and I supported accordingly, but he feels that "a thorough working-over by at least one outside copyeditor" is needed, so that's what I'm here to ask for. Can anyone spare some time to fix it up? Here's the FAC; scroll to the bottom. Tezero (talk) 01:31, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Additional developer(s)[edit]

I just wonder which is the best way to list additional developer in the info box section, using a collapsible list like in Far Cry 3 and Call of Duty: Ghosts, or using efn like in Watch Dogs and Grand Theft Auto V. AdrianGamer (talk)

Don't know, but I wish we'd standardise on something. - X201 (talk) 10:44, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Template: Activision[edit]

I have made a template for Activision, but it told me that the page doesn't exists. can someone help
Link: Template: Activision. AdrianGamer (talk)

Fixed - hahnchen 11:55, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much. AdrianGamer (talk)

Some AFDs for your attention[edit]

Old video games are notoriously hard to source as most of the sources are print media (magazines, documents etc.), or the websites that had all the web info are now lost to time, so the current state is not reflective of the notability of the game. For this reason I personally oppose these AFDs. To be fair I am also the creator. But yeah, please check these out and cast your objective vote.--Coin945 (talk) 01:49, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

For the record, all video game related articles nominated at AFD are eventually tagged and listed at WP:VG/D. Much of the community monitors that. So you don't need to alert us here. That being said, I'll try to loon into these some. Sergecross73 msg me 02:35, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
WP:VG/AA is my alternative of choice, if WP:VG/D isn't complete enough for you. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! ·  16:46, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Scottish independence[edit]

Given the possibility of Scotland becoming independent, have we got a precedent for something like this? My own thoughts are that any game created in Scotland while Scotland was part of the UK should stay as a "Developed in the UK", with a possible addition of a "Developed in Scotland" category. Only games made in Scotland after independence day (24 March 2016) should be regarded as a solely Scottish game. Obviously this is hypothetical at the moment and we'll know the real answer in a couple of hours, but it's worth thinking about. - X201 (talk) 09:06, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Is this not a bit too soon? Especially if they will not become fully independent till 2016. We also do not know the results yet. So it can become a full none-issue to begin with. Not to mention it could even be that as the independence is announced that there will be a major exodus of the game developers that are in scotland moving to England. So I can say. I do not know and I do not think anyone knows yet what will happen. So I think its too soon. NathanWubs (talk) 13:10, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Trust me, the edits will start tomorrow if its a yes vote. - X201 (talk) 13:33, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
You are right, for one moment I thought that all IP editors would be sensible. If the vote is yes then I agree with your suggestion. NathanWubs (talk) 13:55, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia didn't exist when the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, or Yugoslavia split up, though games were probably being developed there at those times, and on the other hand I doubt the South Sudanese game industry has produced much of note, so I don't think there's much of a precedent there. I'd recommend not creating a Scottish game category until shortly before the Kingdom actually gains its sovereignty so articles aren't added there in the meantime - in all common sense, games that aren't far into development before independence but are from notable publishers and likely to be finished will probably still be being developed in Scotland after independence, but technically we don't know that. Saor Alba gu brath! Tezero (talk) 14:43, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
They said no, so we are save for now. NathanWubs (talk) 06:37, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

So much for trying to be proactive on Wikipedia :-) - X201 (talk) 08:05, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank god they voted no! Jaguar 10:20, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Comments needed[edit]

Could you have a quick look at the Remove alternative field name (Mode) discussion over on the template talk page please. I think its an open and shut case, but some comments would be helpful, thanks. - X201 (talk) 15:03, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Is Tropes vs. Women considered notable for reception inclusion?[edit]

I can't tell you how many times this argument has come up and gone unresolved, so I profoundly want a firm conclusion to be reached. I don't care that much - its use in individual game articles to me is limited to (1) reiterating that SJWs have a large and vocal presence in gaming journalism and (2) cluing readers in to how repetitive and tired Anita Sarkeesian's arguments are - but I very much disdain the apparent current reality of having it removed from some articles while it stays in others. Tezero (talk) 14:38, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Can you clarify your question? Do you mean 'Should Anita Sarkeesian's opinion be included in the reception sections of video game articles'? Sam Walton (talk) 14:59, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, sorry, it's that. Tezero (talk) 15:22, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I've only watched one of them fully, but I would say that Tropes should only be used if the specific game already has a larger discussion from other sources on the issues that the Tropes videos touch on for that game (so that the Tropes bit would be adding to, and not creating, that), I would not include a section based on what Tropes says if that is the only source talking about that. (eg, one I did watch she talks about issues in BioShock, which I can see her point on, but it also is the only source for that I've ever seen, and so would be a WP:FRINGE problem to include). --MASEM (t) 15:01, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I'm not necessarily talking about a section; it could only be a couple of sentences. Tezero (talk) 15:22, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Going off what Serge describes below as good examples, even a few sentences about the Tropes commentary would be undue and FRINGEy if that is the only place where sexist (or other issues) are raised about the specific game. I will note that if those videos get further commentary by others (for example: while she hits on sexism in BioShock in the recent one, I remember seeing a few RSes mentioning "but some of that was what it was like at that time..."), that would be make it appropriate for further commentary within the game. Basically, if it is just her voice on that issue, you shouldn't include it. (And to be clear, this is not because it is Sarkeenian - this applies to all commentary people including, say, Zero Punctuation, TotalBiscuit, Markiplier, etc.) --MASEM (t) 16:04, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
My view seems to mirror Masem's. I wouldn't use it unless it was commentary on a bigger issue. If she complains that Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds is sexist because you can only play as a man, or something like that, I don't think it belongs. Its more of a WP:UNDUE voice, the game itself isn't fundamentally sexist, and that really wasn't what most reviewers got out of the experience. Now, if its something more like Lollipop Chainsaw, where the game received a lot of commentary in their portrayal of women, then I think her comments would be more appropriate. I wouldn't create a whole section just for what Tropes says, but if it was a big enough deal, I could see it being a whole section, with Tropes contributing to it. Sergecross73 msg me 15:38, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Be sure you aren't conflating your own views on the subject with critics'; for example, perhaps others do think only playing as a man in certain games is sexist. (On a related note, to clarify, I don't mean to edit POINTily here; I was just listing what I think the most likely outcomes of Sarkeesian inclusion are. And I actually do think there's a lot of outright sexism - as well as the problem of just not thinking about female characters and gamers - in the industry; it's more of a Don't Shoot the Message issue.) Having said that, a consensus of your larger point does seem to be forming. Tezero (talk) 16:16, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Just a thought[edit]

Avoiding getting off topic, did any of you guys have a bad experience with the reddit gaming subbreddit? Their community seems incredibely harsh. URDNEXT (talk) 16:07, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I haven't been on Reddit much except r/atheism and r/spacedicks, both profound experiences. If you don't like Reddit's community, though, avoid 4chan at all costs. Tezero (talk) 16:09, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Funningly enough, 4chan seemed better. I guess I'll just stay on the Twitter camp. URDNEXT (talk) 16:12, 19 September 2014 (UTC)