Talk:Machinima

Template:Maintained

Etymology

The existing information that the word is a portmanteau of "machine" and "cinema" is correct. It may also be of interest to note that it is an accidental mutation of a conscious neologism. I just wrote an account [1] of the origins of the term, including quotes from relevant e-mail. (A few years back I would have edited something into the Wikipedia article myself, but things look a little more formal nowadays and I'm worried about the exact rules for citation, and the fact that the article is already large.) --Anthony Bailey 80.229.18.75 21:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Looks like Zsoverman added it; I just cleaned up the reference a bit and clarified the paragraph so that it's clear that Paul Marino's book corroborates your primary account. Wikipedia prefers secondary sources whenever possible. — TKD::Talk 04:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Songvids

Should songvids be mentioned in the context of Machinima? I get the impression they're one of the most prolific amateur forms. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.154.238.36 (talk) 03:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, in cases where a notable machinima production is a video. The article on Paul Marino, for example, mentions his work I'm Still Seeing Breen. But I'm not sure that there's a broad generalization to be made, any more than to say that some machinima productions are comedies, some are used for advertisement or advocacy, etc. If you find a source for a generalization, let us know. — TKD::Talk 01:00, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

List of examples

After some thought, I decided to recast the sprawling examples section as a list for now. I've also cut several unsourced generalizations for now; anything that can be sourced should be added back in. My philosophy is that it's easier and safer to work from sources to add information, not to try to find sources for existing text (in fact, when I wrote the first couple sections of the article, I only used very little of what was there before). The items in the list should eventually be dispersed to appropriate places in the running text (don't worry, we still need to write a whole sections on production techniques, so there will be opportunities to mention the more prevalent engines) or perhaps integrated into list of machinima productions.

Another reason for doing this was that, after discussing things with Drat, another editor of machinima-related articles, we agreed that there are just too many machinima-capable game engines out there nowadays for a prose list by game engine to be viable long-term in this top-level article on machinima. This might've worked a few years ago, but it won't in 2007, not with the proliferation of machinima. Instead, we should try to focus on other ways of organizing notable productions. I've started by listing genres from the Kelland/Morris/Lloyd book. In more general terms, it's a sign of deficient article organization if there are many subsections with one or two paragraphs, as was the case here. It's also generally bad for a section to have 15 paragraphs.

Those who know me know that I don't like long bulleted lists. Short-term, though, I do think that it's at least a marginally better way to present productions not covered elsewhere for now, until we can expand list of machinima productions or incorporate the information elsewhere in the article on a case-by-case basis. I also prefer it in that it somewhat de-emphasizes that this article isn't really meant to be a long list by game engine (by contrast, previously the list probably took up half of the article), but instead a broad overview of the various topics surrounding machinima in general. — TKD::Talk 05:29, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I should also note that I took the liberty of removing productions that were already mentioned in the running text, and one or two productions that I don't think have third-party reliable coverage. If you can find a good non-trivial third-party source for Potentior (which looks interesting, but WP:ILIKEIT doesn't satisfy verifiability and neutral point of view), please do re-add it. Also, I did remove some analysis. In general I don't doubt that it has a sound basis, but on Wikipedia we need a reliable source that directly and specifically provides that analysis. — TKD::Talk 05:42, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Im surprised that Red Vs Blue and Halo CE and Halo 2 aren't mentioned. Wasn't is those games which made machinima main stream. I think that the introduction of their series should be included in the page due to it being a major turning point in machinima history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leemyster (talk • contribs) 19:30, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

That list is basically a random sampling of examples that have yet to be integrated into the main text; it's not really meant to be comprehensive, but rather almost a to-do list. That's why it's named "other notable examples". Read the history section; Red vs. Blue and Halo are mentioned. — TKD::Talk 20:18, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Machinima Legal Issues/Microsoft Rules/Blizzard Rules

I've noticed the article is completely devoid of any discussion of the legal issues in machinima? I know there is significant disagreement among scholars on some of the finer points, but shouldn't it at least be brought up? To the same end, what about the new Microsoft and Blizzard machinima rules? The most up to date analysis I've seen on Microsoft's is at [2], and Blizard's are discussed [3]. Any thoughts on inclusion? I figured it would go into the legal section as two subsections, unless "Machinima Legal Issues" is an article-caliber topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.54.171.220 (talk) 21:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the article needs to have coverage of this topic, but I'm not sure that the links that you provided qualify as a reliable source, since it is self-published material by an author whose prior work in that area does not appear to have been published in a reliable source. — TKD::Talk 17:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

His work on video game legal issues has been published in the Gaming Law Review. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.54.171.220 (talk • contribs)

OK; thanks for that. I wasn't familiar with his work. I'll keep all of these links in mind when writing that section, unless, of course, someone beats me to it. :) — TKD::Talk 16:18, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

The way it's written now, it seems a bit biased towards the gaming industries. Any thoughts about it?93.125.198.182 (talk) 17:58, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Legal

What is the legal status of the videos?--Playstationdude (talk) 02:09, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

It depends on the End-User License Agreement. Most game developers/publishers retain the rights to their graphics and animation; some game EULAs address this and allow for non-profit, amateur distibution for Machinima productions. A tiny minority of companies grant a commercial use license. Quite a lot of Machinima is technically illegal.... Prof Wrong (talk) 12:03, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I hope you people that work on Wiki can see this request. I would like a list filled with Machinimas. Here is a requested list.

Red Vs blue Spriggs Civil Protection P.A.N.I.C. The Naighberhood

And so on..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.233.247.10 (talk) 17:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

This article is longer than the actual Animation article

Some serious trimming needs to happen to cut the useless information. Everything ever produced doesn't need to get mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.148.7.199 (talk) 14:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

This is old, but I'm replying anyway for posterity, and since my point will still hold. Given the extreme importance of animation, there are many articles covering various specific aspects of the topic, so that's something to consider. We haven't spun off subarticles here because it hasn't been necessary yet. The majority of this article (including the examples in the History, Genres, and Production processes sections) is cited to reliable sources. — TKD::Talk 07:27, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

SMIL

Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language is very relevant for multimedia and machinima subtitling and language translation.

Check this explanation:

http://collaborative-translation.ning.com/group/subtitling/forum/topic/show?id=2237585%3ATopic%3A1605 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.51.137.243 (talk) 05:42, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

No mention of Digital Ph33r?

I know i sound like a fan boy but shouldn't digital ph33r be included somewhere in the article. It doesnt have to be a large amount but something considering that his use of machinima has made machinima very mainstream —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leemyster (talk • contribs) 14:54, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Do you have sources for that? Last time I checked, it was Red vs. Blue that really helped machinima get on the map, some five years ago, and we've got loads of sources to back it up.--Drat (Talk) 15:11, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

List of games used

Something needs to be done about this list. It should be for games that are commonly used, particularly in notable productions, not every game that is used. People keep adding games that they clearly personally use in their ludicrously non-notable shows. For example, the Smash Brothers games, of which the most notable example they seem to be able to cite is Smashtasm, which has not (as far as I can tell through searching), been covered non-trivially if at all by reliable independent sources.--Drat (Talk) 06:05, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Well... that's just incorrect. search ssb machinima on Google or Youtube, and you'll get way more results then just smashtasm. 74.73.142.163 (talk) 01:11, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Have any of those been covered non-trivially in multiple, reliable independent sources?--Drat (Talk) 02:23, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Agree with Drat. 74, keep in mind that Wikipedia has a no original research policy. It's not that anyone is saying that those games are never used, but in order to achieve notability and avoid original research, this list needs to be better-sourced. Kyle Maxwell (talk) 04:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I removed the list of software and video games outright. Any relevant, cited examples should be integrated into prose form. As it was, a number of those games (Quake, Halo) were already cited in the History section, so there was no need to repeat them in a laundry list here. On top of this, the software section was more external links than useful contextual information (only one of the programs was a blue link). — TKD::Talk 07:21, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

RuneScape?

could RuneScape movies be considered? over half of RS's community (pretty large, considering its the most popular browser MMO in the world) are also deeply invovled in RS Vids, allthough I wouldnt consider the thousands of Music VIdeos (RSMVs) part of it, many many RuneScapers make their own Machinima with RS (the IM feature with the words appearing over a characters head helps), and TehNoobShow has a large following with his popular comedy series, in fact, he sums up the whole phenomenon with his RSMV, "RuneScape Idiot". In closing, RuneScape vids should be considered. (last time I checked, there was way more RS Vids then there was World of Warcraft) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.224.25.70 (talk) 01:14, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Have any of them been covered non-trivially in multiple, reliable independent sources?--Drat (Talk) 01:55, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

No ICTON?

As someone who's been watching Garry's Mod Machinima, I also think the ICTON team needs a mention in Machinima, I would also would say that to Jaanus Syndicate but JS isn't really popular, but with Djy1991 with 40,000 subscribers( Since I last checked) I think ICTON should have a fair mention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.78.82.79 (talk) 22:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Have any reliable, independent sources covered the productions non-trivially? Cripes I hate sounding like a broken record.--Drat (Talk) 02:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Some potential sources

Just noting, for future references, some possible new sources to use:

• http://books.google.com/books?id=UgZsi_DOKoQC&pg=PA261&dq=%2Bmachinima#PPA263,M1 -- some good stuff on history here, among other things
• http://books.google.com/books?id=2Adk9hp8nh8C&pg=PA114&dq=%2Bmachinima&lr=#PPA122,M1 -- camera control
• http://books.google.com/books?id=UM-xyczrZuQC&pg=PT527&dq=%2Bmachinima&lr=#PPT528,M1 -- high-level of mentioning how machinima deconstructs concepts originally inherent in the game
• http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/dmal.9780262633598.165?cookieSet=1 -- Another really good Lowood writing. Spends some time on The French Democracy, but also covers a lot of other stuff.

— TKD::Talk 10:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Another list of sources: http://www.cc.gatech.edu/gvu/machinima/papers.html — TKD::^Talk 19:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Directory external link

WP:EL states that a directory link may be appropriate. Currently we use the ODP directory. What do people think about using Machinima Premiere's directory instead? Unlike the ODP, it includes the three other external links that we currently list, appears to be more comprehensive, and is more suited to specialist and engine-specific knowledge. Because of these considerations, we can simply link to that one directory only, and tell people to get their links added there, not here, minimizing, and probably altogether eliminating, need for discussing any new links. Thoughts? — TKD::{talk} 17:43, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that new link is vastly more comprehensive. I'll put it in now.--Drat (Talk) 21:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

It appears that I was wrong about two of the sites; I must've not had enough caffeine yet. :) Oh well, three links is better than four, and the directory spins off to more material. — TKD::{talk} 21:40, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Machinima.com

Machinima.com is a massive hub and viewing center for machinima, why is not listed in the article or external links? 129.96.126.4 (talk) 04:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

It's already listed in the Machinima Premiere directory. Since that directory has many relevant machinima links spanning a broad range of interests, we chose to link to that to minimize the number of useful external links that would be listed separately. — TKD::{talk} 05:12, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

the Machinima Premiere Directory has been down for some time. Someone has added a link to Machinima.com, perhaps including a few more video resources and other sites would be a good idea. Etownunder (talk) 15:04, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

No one seems to want to update the external links. I'll attempt to remove the mprem link which now goes to a SEDO landing page. I suggest adding links to other sources that would help users like Koinup, GamersTube, and Machinination. Users finding this article get little help out of the external links section at the present time, the above links would help them find places to host and discuss machinima. Etownunder (talk) 17:22, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect Information

"Originally, the rules created confusion; one machinima group, Edgeworks Entertainment, incorrectly interpreted them as a reduction of machinima creators' rights". From what I have been told and read(I can find a link), the Microsoft Rules did limit rights. Without the ability to make DVDs this group in particular stopped creating Machinima and selling their DVDs. Microsoft also has been reportingly ignoring emails and/or any business idea for Machinima creation for a licensing. Thanks, --66.169.200.163 (talk) 03:00, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

The long and short of that sentence is that fair use still applied. Whether DVD production and distribution falls under that protection was, and would still be, something for a court to decide based on the four-factor test specified in U.S. copyright law.

Here's how the cited source explains the situation:

Some machinimists did not understand that the Microsoft Rules benefited them; they did not realize that the Microsoft Rules did not (and, as a unilateral license, legally could not) reduce any preexisting rights, but instead expanded machinimists' rights by explicitly allowing limited uses of Microsoft's intellectual property.

Mind you, this is from an article in the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, so we're dealing with a high-quality source. As for "reportingly ignoring emails", we would definitely need a third-party reliable source (i.e., neither Microsoft nor the complainant) for that. — TKD::{talk} 07:18, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Right and I agree,though the problem is that Edgeworks even requested a bunch of times to be allowed a licensing, but they were denied and it is a fact that nobody else owns a licensing from microsoft to sell DVDs. If you can show me a single other source that is allowed the same rights as Rooster Teeth, then I can agree with the statement fully. Thank you, --66.169.200.163 (talk) 18:57, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think that such a source exists (I've been looking at various sources for this article for months), but, regardless, fair use is a provision for the unlicensed use of a copyrighted work. The addition of whether other groups have actually been able to acquire commercial licensing would be an interesting, orthogonal point. — TKD::{talk} 20:22, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Garry's Mod

Is Garry's mod mentioned in here? Because using Garry's mod is a great machimation tool, and many good video's have been made in it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.221.246 (talk) 07:30, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Have any of these productions been covered significantly by reliable, independent sources? There are a great many games, mods, etc. used for machinima, we don't need to list them all.--Drat (Talk) 08:02, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Just wanna say I agree here, Garry's mod should be mentioned somewhere here because it is almost made for making machinimas and is one of the most widely used tools to do so. - zalkar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.139.81.117 (talk) 03:20, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

(I fixed format of previous post)--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:29, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Excellent article

This is professional stuff. Congratulations. Tony (talk) 13:50, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

3D or 2D

I'm pretty sure the machinima can be made out of anything; therefore, it doesn't have to be 3D as the article suggests.
Phlum (talk) 11:32, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

True, as a game engine programmer myself I can say that there is no real fundamental difference between 2D or 3D in this respect. Something does not need to move in the Z axis to be animated, and 2D and 3D game engines are still based on the same premises. Technopeasant (talk) 03:50, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

The first picture

Couldn't we cut off all the black in the first picture? DavidHøstbo (talk) 18:23, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, the image info addresses this: "Note: The preservation of black letterboxing is intentional; the video was distributed thus. The letterboxing was used as a post-production technique to hide undesirable elements of the head-up display. Please do not crop the screenshot." Eik Corell (talk) 19:36, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Language and 'Style'

Style is very subjective, and I find dogmatic grammar and style rules annoying. Common conventions, however, make for easier reading and comprehension.

In the section Limitations and solutions

"It may be possible to point the camera elsewhere or employ other creative cinematography or acting.[86] For example, Tristan Pope combined creative character and camera positioning with video editing to suggest sexual actions in his controversial film Not Just Another Love Story.[87]"

may read better as

"Tristan Pope worked around limited expression by creative character and camera positioning to suggest sexual actions in his controversial film Not Just Another Love Story[87]. Creative camera work, cinematography, and acting may address many such limitations[86]"

That the film was controversial may be interesting but not strictly neccessary in this sentence under this heading.

If this paragraph started with something like

"Limited character motion and expression is a difficult problem for current (April 2010) machinima creators."

then some of the phrases in the paragraph (like Another solution) may be unneccesary.

196.23.21.91 (talk) 03:20, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

External links

The "External links" section was pretty bad, and, given that this is a GA, I decided to nuke it and start from scratch with just the Open Directory Project link. (I put the bibliographies in the to-do section; they seem more appropriate there.) It's a shame that Machinima Premiere seems to be dead, because that was a useful directory. Does anyone know of any other good, neutral, WP:EL-conformant machinima link directory to use?

By the way, I'm of the opinion that we shouldn't be linking to engine-specific sites, because that's a slippery slope of "why this engine and not this other one?" There's just too many engines for that to be tenable these days. —TKD [talk][c] 19:17, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Linked to the archive.org collection as well. I'm not really that fond of the ODP link, for lack of comprehensiveness, and would prefer a directory maintained by a more machinima-specific site, but I don't think we need more than one directory link and the archive.org link. —TKD [talk][c] 19:24, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Enlightens?

I don't understand the first sentence of this article, particularly the use of the verb 'enlighten'. Is this some sort of jargon? It just seems like poor English to me. --2.105.139.62 (talk) 19:53, 6 August 2014 (UTC)