Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 209: Line 209:


''[[The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Seasons and Oracle of Ages]]'' is currently scheduled as [[WP:TFA|today's featured article]] on May 21. I took a quick look over and for an older FA it seems in good shape, but as the main nominator is no longer active, some more eyes on it to make sure it's still up to date and for its main page appearance would be good. [[User:David Fuchs|<span style="color: #cc6600;">Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs</span>]] <sup><small>[[User talk:David Fuchs|<span style="color: #cc6600;">talk</span>]]</small></sup> 19:49, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
''[[The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Seasons and Oracle of Ages]]'' is currently scheduled as [[WP:TFA|today's featured article]] on May 21. I took a quick look over and for an older FA it seems in good shape, but as the main nominator is no longer active, some more eyes on it to make sure it's still up to date and for its main page appearance would be good. [[User:David Fuchs|<span style="color: #cc6600;">Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs</span>]] <sup><small>[[User talk:David Fuchs|<span style="color: #cc6600;">talk</span>]]</small></sup> 19:49, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
::No it isn’t, nothing is scheduled past the 4th. In fact there is a non specific date nomination for [[Final Fantasy IX]] which could be problematic for this if it goes though.--[[Special:Contributions/67.70.101.238|67.70.101.238]] ([[User talk:67.70.101.238|talk]]) 21:05, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
::That’s not accurate since nothing is scheduled last 4th. In fact there is a non specific date nomination for [[Final Fantasy IX]] which could be problematic for this if it goes though.--[[Special:Contributions/67.70.101.238|67.70.101.238]] ([[User talk:67.70.101.238|talk]]) 21:05, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:07, 24 April 2021

WikiProject iconVideo games Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:


"Computer game"

I see that computer game redirects to PC game. The "PC game" lead begins: A PC game, also known as a computer game...

Is the right redirect, and not video game? I think "computer game" is often used interchangeably with any kind of video game, whether played on a PC or not. (This may be less true in North America?)

Also, is a video game played on a Mac therefore not a computer game, by this logic? Popcornfud (talk) 12:29, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we could move computer game (disambiguation) to computer game and get rid of the redirect. Computer game can mean multiple things, so I don't think targeting a specific page is the right idea. JOEBRO64 12:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Computer game" generally being referred to as "PC game" (where PC is "personal computer" which would include Mac/Linux systems) is supported from one of Wolf's books (if not others), though the hatnotes at PC game properly get people to video game if that's what they really meant. I'm not sure if we can move that disambiguation page. --Masem (t) 13:18, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Having asked a couple of American friends about this, they definitely feel the terms aren't used interchangeably in AmE, but I can assure you that they definitely are (or have been) in other English-speaking parts of the world. Popcornfud (talk) 13:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can appreciate this concern. The colloquial use refers to a PC game, but the more literal application would broadly encompass Video games as a whole. Maybe the disambiguation could be adjusted in its elaboration and provide Video game as an option for redirection? Fact Scanner (talk) 13:25, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
here's a weird idea, what if "Computer game" was the disambiguation page but "Computer games" still led to PC game?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 13:54, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The issue being posed by Popcornfud would still exist in that case. Also, on its own terms, I don't know if the suggested change would work out intuitively or provide any benefit either, as it seems like an arbitrary manner of setting the redirect. Fact Scanner (talk) 14:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I personally despise article titles that different only in case or a single letter. That Wikipedia believes this is clear enough disambiguation for readers is silly. -- ferret (talk) 14:11, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Fact Scanner: From what I understand, he's asking if there is enough to distinguish games on PC games from any form of games. At the moment, there is Arcade game and Console game, so naturally Computer game article would exist if notable because they are not on arcades or consoles but it is a form of gaming.
@Ferret: very well, then we don't have to do that idea.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 14:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Blue Pumpkin Pie: To me, his concern reads as not necessarily agreeing with the term computer game redirecting to pc game due to the term being potentially referential to video games in general. He also brings up another pitfall of the classification that exists due to PC also having become colloquially -and in marketing- used as a term to reference hardware running Windows or hardware that doesn't run Apple OS. Fact Scanner (talk) 14:26, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, that's right. Popcornfud (talk) 14:28, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I believe I already addressed that with the suggestion of Computer game just being the main disambiguation page instead of Computer game (disambiguation). I just added the idea that Computer Games would still redirect to PC games (an idea that I'm not holding strongly and was just a suggestion). Computer game should just have a disambiguation page that shows all the possible articles. As far as "Apple OS", there is "MacOS" and there is "iOS", so far from what I see on Wikipedia, MacOS and iOS are still separate and support different hardware. So I'm a little confused at the moment about the question. Is there an operating system that runs on both a computer and other devices not classified as a computer?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 14:37, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is that the fundamental problem would still exist with that posed solution unless the disambiguation (regardless of how it's configured) is expanded to include video games as an option and has the descriptor adjusted to reflect that increased breadth. With regard to the bit your asking about, it isn't to suggest that there's a non-computer device that runs an OS, it's to highlight that the issue of computer game being matter-of-factly redirected to pc game is not how the other similar issue is handled; pc game usually being used to reference a game on Windows/non-Apple hardware didn't prevent the pc game article from being referential of all games on the hardware-type regardless of OS. Basically just an example to show that the way these were handled is inconsistent.Fact Scanner (talk) 15:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If there are reliable sources that refer to video games as computer games regardless of the platform, then we can include that as an alternate name in video games and if we go with my proposal of making Computer games the main disambiguation page, then we can add video games as one of the options. So it's a very simple fix.
Once again. I just don't understand this inference that PC gaming is specifically on non-Apple devices. Where is this coming from?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 15:31, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For the first matter, the Terminology section of the video game page itself both defines and references this clearly. Not only this, but it is literally established in the Oxford dictionary and likely others. For the second, the very history of the Personal Computing industry at the rise of apple had a very prominent space of market distinction perpetuated by Apple in dozens of Mac vs. PC ads and gereral rhetoric, journalists in the field across multiple generations spanning to this very one as would be made evident by googling "Mac vs. PC" and looking at the news section, and the broader computer enthusiast communities who make the colloquial distinction themselves. This is a long and broadly evident matter. It's almost surprising to read of someone unfamiliar with the matter when discussing related concepts, frankly. Fact Scanner (talk) 15:56, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Then if the article already recognizes Video games as computer games then my solution to making "Computer game" into a disambiguation page should address all the concerns necessary.
I had a feeling that this was coming from a simple Mac vs PC mentality. Keep in mind Mac vs PC is recentism. Yes, Mac owners and non-apple owners are different breeds of customers and modern Mac owner aren't recognize for what PC gaming is known for, but that doesn't mean all non-Apple devices are not PC gaming. The Mac vs PC is mostly an advertisement war, but they're both PCs, therefore any games on them is PC gaming (and if Apple Arcade it may still be relevant in modern PC gaming). Apple is still historically relevant to PC gaming such as Apple II, Apple IIGS, Classic Mac OS. Regardless, modern Mac gaming is part of PC gaming history, even if it doesn't fit the mold you want PC gaming to have.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 16:14, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is basically why we try to avoid using "PC" (the abbreviation) in describing platforms and spell it out instead (Microsoft Windows, or for older games, MS-DOS, etc.). It can be confused between "personal computers" (which is generally what is meant) and the "[IBM]-PC compatible" platform, which (as I recall) how the term was more likely used in the 1990s but as Macs and Linux systems got game, was dropped to just Personal Computers. The Mac v PC campaign did help confuse the terms. --Masem (t) 16:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the confusion when it comes to Personal Computer (PC) and IBM-PC. Its a valid point. I think in that case i will support the idea that we should renaming it to "Video games on personal computers" as you suggested. Should Console games and Arcade games follow the same naming convention?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 16:23, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Only if it's backed up by reliable sources that computer games are also commonly referred to as video games and more common than referring to Computer games from PC games. If we can verify that, I would support this.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 15:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"computer game" or "PC game" is not really a genre. There is something to be said that a "PC game" have generally had different flavors of gaming from arcade or console up until the mid-2000s (the confluence of console and PC hardware to help portability), so it is a distinct idea. But we may need consider that while this is a fully valid term, it is a bit vague, and maybe it may be better to have what is at "PC game" as "Video games on personal computers", which then we can describe the ideas and distinctions of PC/Computer game relative to video games; this would also clarify that this includes your DOS , IBM-PC, Windows, Mac, Linux, and any other OS that has desktop versions, rather than tie it mistakenly to just PC-compatible computers. --Masem (t) 16:15, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I feel the "PC game" article should be restricted specifically to games on Windows and IBM-compatible computers, because that's what the term "PC" usually means. No one would ever call a Commodore 64 or ZX Spectrum game a "PC game", and yet there also isn't an article that covers games on all computer platforms, so they get lumped into the PC game article. Perhaps, alongside the Windows-focused "PC game" article, we should make a new umbrella article titled "home computer game" or something along those lines. Phediuk (talk) 16:24, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • "PC game" to related to the IBM-PC compatible platform (MS-DOS and extending to Windows) was likely popular in the 1990s as to distinguish it from C64 or Mac games. But today, "PC game" is used to differentiate games from "console games" or "mobile games", and thus applies to games played on any PC. I definitely would not create a separate article to distinguish "IMB-PC compat" games from general "personal computer games" (that's far too narrow a cut) but we do want to be clear about this change in terminology if we can do that. --Masem (t) 17:05, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Phediuk: I again agree with Masem, the modern definition of Personal Computer (PC) has evolved to the point that a home computer is considered a type of personal computer. This is made relevant in the articles such as home computer and microcomputer. I also find it not useful to make a separate article and try to monitor the term "PC" to the old definition. I think most readers want to know the history of games on all personal computers home/personal/micro.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 17:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It would take some work as these are not easily searchable but looking through archives of the 1980s magazines to see how terms are used following the introduction of the IBM-PC in 1985 (which is where "personal computer" derived from), particularly to compare games that only came out on the IBM-PC compat platform compared to Amiga /etc, to verify that at that time (late 80s/early 90s) that "PC game" was more implicitly "IBM-PC game" rather than all personal computer games. I will say that by the mid-1990s, with Doom's + Myst's success, "PC game" representing games on any personal computer was clearly the norm. It would be nice to be able to spell this out somewhere but it's hard to find sourcing for it. --Masem (t) 17:34, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per request, here are some random examples of British RSses using "computer game" and "video game" as interchangeable terms: BBC, BBC, Guardian, Guardian, Times, Independent. One explanation for this etymology might be older gaming computers popular in the UK like the BBC Micro, Spectrum, and Amiga. Popcornfud (talk) 16:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good on you for the references. Don't honestly see why it's necessary when the video game article itself acknowledges the matter already, but it's some added weight regardless. Fact Scanner (talk) 17:08, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize, I wasn't discounting the term or demanding proof. I was just making sure that it was covered in the article. I was satisfied with Fact Scanner's response that it was already covered in the article. With that said we have a few options solutions that we can implement.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 17:13, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fun fact: in Russian, "компьютерная игра" (kompyuternaya igra) is literally "computer game" and that's the one and only term any sources use. There is no "video game". Fun fact concluded. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 11:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would suspect that this was due to lack of any official console or arcade game sales into the country (combo of the USSR and the weak protection for IP). I would not be surprised to see a similar situation in China where the primary form of gaming was on computers due to the console ban. However, as we are en.wiki, we do want to focus on the English treatment of the language, and can mention the side cases if they are well sourced. --Masem (t) 16:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect request

[ Discussion moved to Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_April_18#Computer_game ]

Yet another new platform to consider: Oculus Quest 2

In reading news that we're getting yet another remake of RE4 but in VR [1], I learned that the upcoming Oculus Quest 2 will not require a base platform to run , unlike prior VR systems. This arguably makes it a new gaming platform; in the same discussions that we have agreed to Stadia and Amazon Luna to be new gaming platforms, should we consider the Quest 2 as a separate gaming platform?

Alternatively, if a game is a VR game (full VR or that includes a VR mode), might we want to say that a platform is VR (not specific to any model)? --Masem (t) 22:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quest 2 has been out for some time. Like Quest 1, it runs as a standalone unit, that's correct. Quest 1 and 2 aren't that different - kind of like different generations of iPod. Both units share a unique Quest store for game purchases (and other apps). The Quest should absolutely be treated as a platform imo. Popcornfud (talk) 22:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Which is why I ask, do we narrow it down to the specific headset (Which I can see flooding infoboxes for titles that have highly portable VR versions) or just call it VR and leave it to the body to sort it out? If we go this direction, I'd think I'd prefer the VR route, its the easiest, and we can argue the "availability" for different VR systems is similar to calling storefronts (in being inappropriate in the infobox though fine in the body). --Masem (t) 22:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree with this. Or maybe we could have a dedicated VR parameter? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:03, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We've been doing a good job trimming out excess parameters on the infobox and while I could see some benefit of "VR support=yes/no", it's just one of those things that get too far into weeds that 1) are better explained in the lede/body and 2) would lead to other requests along the same lines such as other controller support or storefront options. I think just saying that "virtual reality" is a valid platform in the infobox not only covers a situation like with this RE4 VR remake but for other games that have VR (like No Man's Sky) quickly shows its available. It's just the nuances of whether we break that up further by Oculus/HTC/Steam/etc. to be more exact, or keep it simple which may seem deceptive (eg RE4 VR is an Oculus exclusive but the box would just say "Virtual reality"). I could argue that if we stood with just using VR, and the game is available on exactly one VR system, we could add ("Oculus-only") after VR to explain that; we'd not list out each VR system when it is available for multiple VR systems. --Masem (t) 20:10, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, I'm fine with adding it, but I always support expanding what's considered acceptable to list in the "platforms" area. Sergecross73 msg me 01:28, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps we need to start a separate parameter for "Platform type" since there are only few types of Platforms: Home Console, Handheld console, Personal computer, mobile phone, and now VR?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 20:10, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Last of Us Part II critical response

I've just started a new discussion at Talk:The Last of Us Part II#"Critical response" opening sentence and would appreciate any new opinions. Thanks! – Rhain ☔ 03:29, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Short Description redux

In the recent (very helpful) discussion on this subject, Masem wrote 'If we are just trying to designate a video game separate from a different term, then year, "YYYY video game" is more than sufficient. It is when we have to disambiguate against any other "video game" with the same or similar name, the year is not quite sufficient as that's the less common way to attach identity to a game, hence using either the genre or the devs, depending on which one is likely more useful (eg the Prey example).' But what do we do in the (appallingly common) situation where the name, genre, and developer are all the same, e.g. Clock Tower (1995 video game) and Clock Tower (1996 video game), Doom (1993 video game) and Doom (2016 video game)?--Martin IIIa (talk) 14:50, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Simple: 1995 video game, 1996 video game, 1993 video game, 2016 video game. The years aren't the same, so we don't need to disambiguate them any further. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:25, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
+1 to this. I find it best not to overthink short descriptions. As long as it's helping someone pick an article out from a menu of options, it's probably good enough! DocFreeman24 (talk) 21:36, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, as developer + genre is the same there's really no easy additions to distinguish these further, though in the Clock Tower games it could be platform ("Super Famicom" v "PlayStation") since the year's are rather close. Doom's case is far harder since everything's the same, but the year difference should be sufficient to make it clear which is which. --Masem (t) 17:43, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

StarCraft vs StarCraft II

A page split at StarCraft is being discussed at Talk:StarCraft#Starcraft_II_split. Primarily, is "StarCraft" (covering only the original game and it's single expansion) a distinct series/franchise separate from "StarCraft II"? -- ferret (talk) 14:18, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Name discussion at Wipeout (Psygnosis video game series)

Theres currently a discussion at Wipoue article. If anyone wants to add any input, you can find the discussion here Talk:Wipeout (Psygnosis video game series)#Article name change.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 16:58, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, there's an AfD you can access here. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of video games based on Wipeout (2008 American game show).Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 20:21, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FAC Note

We currently have five video game featured article candidates. It would be appreciated if they could get some extra numbers.

And to note, Final Fantasy IX is a TFL candidate. Panini!🥪 12:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Colors for infobox video game player

There is a discussion at Template talk:Infobox video game player regarding adding team colors for esports player articles, similar to other sports player articles. Opinions are welcome. Pbrks (talk) 01:52, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We just had a similar discussion about infobox colors and fictional characters, and the consensus was strongly in favor of not using different colors. I'm not sure what would be different about esports players... Sergecross73 msg me 02:01, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I didn't see that discussion. This is, however, this is a widely used standard, and it is not used purely for decorative reasons, which was the main reason for opposing colors in the infoboxes from the previous discussion. Pbrks (talk) 02:16, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New Articles (April 12 to April 18)

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/New article announcements
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.6 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 02:49, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 12

April 13

April 14

April 15

April 16

April 17

April 18

This has been a heck of a week for me, so this slipped my mind until tonight. We should be back on schedule next week. --PresN 02:49, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thank you for doing this on any timetable at all! Sergecross73 msg me 03:04, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think Gnosia has a fighting chance to be a better article if anyone is interested in helping flesh out the page. GamerPro64 04:22, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently missing 電撃攻略ステーション (Dengeki Kouyraku Station) section at the main Dengeki PlayStation/ASCII entries

Was browsing through Yahoo! Japan auctions and noticed several listings showing 電撃攻略ステーション (Dengeki Kouryaku Station). Neither the English version here or the Japanese wikis mentioned this, but given how old and infrequently published this "special magazine" is, I'm not surprised it isn't mentioned. (In fact, not all of the listings used the full name, either just "電撃攻略" or "電撃" with the volume number.) Just a FYI in case anyone wants to/is able to research further. -23.241.11.196 (talk) 19:42, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Seasons and Oracle of Ages TFA in May

The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Seasons and Oracle of Ages is currently scheduled as today's featured article on May 21. I took a quick look over and for an older FA it seems in good shape, but as the main nominator is no longer active, some more eyes on it to make sure it's still up to date and for its main page appearance would be good. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 19:49, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That’s not accurate since nothing is scheduled last 4th. In fact there is a non specific date nomination for Final Fantasy IX which could be problematic for this if it goes though.--67.70.101.238 (talk) 21:05, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games&oldid=1019689963"