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
No edit summary
Line 290: Line 290:
:I think the legacy section should address the ''significant'' impact a game had on the series, like ''Mario 3''{{'s}} overworld map. When talking about sequels, I'd mention stuff like what the developers learned from the first game and give a concise (1-2 sentence) summary of the sequel. For instance, a lot of ''Donkey Kong Country 2'' is composed of material that was cut from the first ''DKC'', so that'd definitely merit a mention in the legacy section. [[User:TheJoebro64|<small style="color:red">JOE</small>]][[User talk:TheJoebro64|<small>BRO</small>]][[Special:Contributions/TheJoebro64|<span style="color:#D18719">64</span>]] 22:29, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
:I think the legacy section should address the ''significant'' impact a game had on the series, like ''Mario 3''{{'s}} overworld map. When talking about sequels, I'd mention stuff like what the developers learned from the first game and give a concise (1-2 sentence) summary of the sequel. For instance, a lot of ''Donkey Kong Country 2'' is composed of material that was cut from the first ''DKC'', so that'd definitely merit a mention in the legacy section. [[User:TheJoebro64|<small style="color:red">JOE</small>]][[User talk:TheJoebro64|<small>BRO</small>]][[Special:Contributions/TheJoebro64|<span style="color:#D18719">64</span>]] 22:29, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
:Quickly looking at the SSB page, its Legacy section is just a history of the game's sequels which means its essentially just a summary of the game's series article (it admits as much by linking to that article as the section's main article). That certainly shouldn't be what's covered in a Legacy section and really shouldn't be covered in the game's article at all. The series article exists for a reason. Something more akin to what Joebro gave as examples would be much more appropriate and interesting. --[[User:Torsodog|<font color="#000000">'''T'''</font><font color="#993300">orsodo</font><font color="#000000">'''g'''</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Torsodog|Talk]]</sup> 03:35, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
:Quickly looking at the SSB page, its Legacy section is just a history of the game's sequels which means its essentially just a summary of the game's series article (it admits as much by linking to that article as the section's main article). That certainly shouldn't be what's covered in a Legacy section and really shouldn't be covered in the game's article at all. The series article exists for a reason. Something more akin to what Joebro gave as examples would be much more appropriate and interesting. --[[User:Torsodog|<font color="#000000">'''T'''</font><font color="#993300">orsodo</font><font color="#000000">'''g'''</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Torsodog|Talk]]</sup> 03:35, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

==Question regarding lists==

I recently noticed that while we have separate lists for [[List of Nintendo Entertainment System games]] and [[List of Family Computer games]] the [[List of Super Famicom games]] was merged with [[List of Super Nintendo Entertainment System games]] in May 2018. Is there any particular reason that they are handled differently
or should the Family Computer List be merged like the Super Famicom list was?--[[Special:Contributions/69.157.254.64|69.157.254.64]] ([[User talk:69.157.254.64|talk]]) 05:17, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:18, 28 May 2020

Membership

So I put the userbox on my userpage, but I am not in the member list. I want to be in the member list. I created 1 vg related article and put more than 2 edits which was the minimum to get on the list. Thanks NamelessLameless (talk) 05:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Idk if this is the right place to put this. If it is not im sorry, im still kind of new NamelessLameless (talk) 05:49, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It’s been forever, but I think you just have to manually add your name to the list. Sergecross73 msg me 20:18, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Eyes on Mafia

Hi everyone,

Mafia (video game) (and Talk: Mafia (video game)) could use some input. With the announced remake, the subtitle The City of Lost Heaven keeps being readded. I'm on my tablet, which makes editing painfully slow and I'm heading to a 3RR. Help would appreciated. Thanks. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:27, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A helpful editing/sourcing reminder

If you are doing anything on the broader video game concepts/terms, or dealing with some of the more fundamental/influential games that are 5+ years old, make sure to check Google Scholar for sources. There's a lot more scholarship writing about VGs than ever (just avoid student thesises) and those can help flesh out some topics that have drawn academic interest. If you have Chrome, there's an extension "Google Scholar Button" that if you searching for terms in a regular google search, will take you to the same search in Google Scholar making it easy. --Masem (t) 17:59, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notability concern regarding Radical Dreamers

When I was working on getting Satellaview up to GA status, I poked around Wikipedia to "harvest" sources from Satellaview games that could be useful for the page. While doing this, I came across a page for Square's Radical Dreamers, which is a Featured Article and has been since 2008. Looking through it, I'm under the belief that this is not FA-quality, as there's multiple glaring issues with the article that go against the FA criteria: most of the references are just quotes of text from the game or unreliable Chrono Trigger fansites, poor writing in multiple places (ex. "Masato Kato wrote Radical Dreamers after Chrono Trigger's release" doesn't make sense, you don't "write" video games), and the noticeable lack of any kind of reception. This leads into my main problem with the article, which is if the game even meets the notability criteria at all. Nothing reliable on sites like MobyGames, could find very little with a Google search, and the Wayback Machine poses few results outside of brief mentions in writings for the Satellaview. There's a Hardcore Gaming 101 podcast episode on the game, but I don't know how usable that is. I don't want to bring this to FAR quite yet in the event some good reliable sources for this are found, but for the time being I do not believe this is either FA-quality or even notable to have its own article. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 18:44, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was made FA in 2007, and standards were obviously much lower back then. There are actually a bunch of FA and GA articles you could question the notability status of, as the review process doesn't even consider such questions. It's just assumed the article is notable if it's gotten that far. They check mostly prose and how complete it is. I'd say the article would have to be completely re-written and better sources found. And that HG101 podcast would not be one of them. I'd say avoid unscripted podcasts with no editor and checking. It's too off the cuff and errors are way too likely.
Some of the sources cited are translations of solid Japanese sources listed on fan sites. That's fine, but the original Japanese sources need to be found and the citations reformatted completely. It's possible that if you cut the text down to just what can be cited to third parties, then it might be merged into the Chrono series article.
So the game was text heavy, so it likely means that fewer people would have wanted to give in-depth upon release. Pretty much every magazine out there made reference to it and briefly explained it during the release of Chrono Cross but it looks like few actually bothered to review it indepth. That makes sense given it's text heavy and in Japanese, and in a Satellaview broadcast and not a simple game cartridge. Harizotoh9 (talk) 19:37, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I doubt it’s FA quality - many that were promoted in the 2006-2009 era probably aren’t anymore - but it definitely has notability. Even if you’re not happy with what’s in the article, I’ve seen it get coverage over the years in the context of “lost/rare entries in series” type retrospectives. Please notify me before you start up a formal merge or AFD discussion on it and I’ll do some digging. Sergecross73 msg me 20:15, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, if it was promoted that long ago then I think it's worth it to try an FAR. Note that FAR is actually not to just delist the article; it's to get a solid analysis of if it's FA quality, and what needs to change. I'd try to improve the article at least a bit before nominating it for FAR, so it could have a better chance of surviving.
Also just throwing it in there that the HG101 podcast is probably fine to use; HG101 is reliable so I think that their reliability would translate to the podcast. JOEBRO64 20:36, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • … poor writing in multiple places (ex. "Masato Kato wrote Radical Dreamers after Chrono Trigger's release" doesn't make sense, you don't "write" video games) What? Sure you do. Wikipedia is happy to say that people "write" comic books, television and movies, why would it be different for video games (let alone a "text-based adventure game", where the writing is very much a key component)? I can buy that using "write" for video games is potentially ambiguous (since it could be writing story or writing code), but it's absolutely not in this case, since 1) Kato is known as a writer, not a programmer and 2) the very next sentence says he "composed the main story". The sentence makes perfect sense. — Kawnhr (talk) 21:16, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Establishing notability

The thing I wanna take care of right off the bat is its notability, since that's my biggest concern (aside from it not being of FA quality). Jovanmilic found some good material but isn't sure if that would be enough for a full-length article, and neither do I. Outside of brief mentions I couldn't find anything, and I don't know if the HG101 podcast would be usable since none of it is scripted, so I don't have a lot to contribute. If anybody has some good coverage of this game from reliable sources, post them here and I'll incorporate them into the article. I'm gonna take this to FAR one way or the other, but it would be nice to actually see if this game even deserves an article in the first place. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 02:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're conflating notability with amount of material to put into a standalone article. These are not the same. It's clear that it's a notable (Japan-only) release. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:37, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Would be helpful to mention the sources that make it notable. WP:ITSNOTABLE can't bring the article anywhere. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 07:37, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's not shocking that there's no indepth coverage as the game could not be imported at all since you needed a Satallaview in Japan, and it's text heavy. So there's no import reviews from print game mags in the 90's. In-depth material would be in Japanese magazines. Harizotoh9 (talk) 10:22, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If parties concerned would please direct their attention to the talk page of Wikiproject Square Enix, we are starting to investigate this issue, and are finding some interviews in Japanese from reliable sources. I do not know at this point how many we will find, but we need more than two days to address an issue we were just made aware of (how weak the article has grown by contrast). Let’s see what we find, and then it will be clear to all what must be done. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:58, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you're completely serious about this: you're going to have to just invest in some Japanese magazines and have them translated. Not just interviews, but proper articles and previews covering the game and its gameplay. I'm certain Dengeki SFC, Famitsu, and others would have had 2-4 page spreads on it. Harizotoh9 (talk) 16:36, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I’ll be helping with cleanup too. I don’t care about FA status, but I feel strongly about the games notability. Sergecross73 msg me 17:13, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I find this game to be particularly interesting (I have an interest in anything related to the Satellaview), so I really hope that notability can be established. I'll spend a bit of time looking for some more stuff if I can. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 17:45, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User Protodrake has put in a huge amount of work and new references on Radical Dreamers. Other than a reception section, which we are still investigating, how do people think it looks now? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:17, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FARs for Square Enix articles?

Related to the situation with Radical Dreamers, I'm starting to wonder if it's possible to do a check-up on the Kingdom Hearts articles that have been promoted to FA and the Chrono Cross article (also an FA) for potential problems before we take them to FAR. Any thoughts or suggestions? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:19, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe bring this up to the Square Enix WikiProject too. GamerPro64 03:40, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Per instructions make sure to bring up possible issues on the talk page and try and get attention to that before starting a FAR. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 17:47, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New Articles (May 11 to May 17)

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 v3.4 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 02:21, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 11

May 12

May 13

May 14

May 15

May 16

May 17

Scope for Sega task force

A discussion regarding the scope of WP:SEGA is taking place at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sega#What should we include in our scope?. Input from project members would be very much appreciated. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:46, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:XXXX sequel video games

A new batch of categories is making its rounds that I find oddly specific. Category:2001 sequel video games and related categories seem like a superfluous combination of Category:Video game sequels and Category:2003 video games. The scope is also very limited and some of these might fail WP:SMALLCAT. Thoughts? IceWelder [✉] 17:00, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think that's not a defining cross-categorization. We don't have these yet, but I could argue that cross-categories like "YYYY first-person shooters" or "YYYY Windows games" might be justifyable as there are history changes within genre and/or platform, but sequels -- no. They should be categorized as sequels, and of course by year, but that's it. --Masem (t) 17:22, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete them all. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:36, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redundant and useless. All of them should be wiped. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 19:36, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Send them to CFD please. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is this going at a rapid clip. @Cwf97: Could you please stop and join this discussion at the CfD above? -- ferret (talk) 15:03, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@IceWelder: You may want to add the "film" version to CfD as well, see [here] -- ferret (talk) 15:05, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferret and others: Due to the sheer size the film categories cover, I created a separate CfD discussion. IceWelder [✉] 21:14, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Considering this editor's prolific output and poor track record, I would consider proposing a TBAN on category creation so they can focus on less controversial and damaging contributions to the project. Axem Titanium (talk) 17:16, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, what the hell is Category:Video game franchises by year of disestablishment? If someone can add that (or start a new CfD), that'd be great. I'm on my very broken phone and my tablet's run out of battery. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:19, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Soetermans:: Went ahead and brought it to CfD. Discussion is here. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 20:30, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User was advised to actually communicate with others nearly 2 years ago and has since proceeded to continue making hundreds of elaborate, superfluous category trees, but only about a dozen edits on talk pages. Is there a local consensus to bring up a WP:TBAN at WP:AN? This is honestly disruptive. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:57, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Within the past two years, this editor has created 986 categories, 128 of which have been deleted, with dozens more at CFD right now. They were dormant for the past few months, but seem to be on a 2000+ edit spree in the last month or so. Axem Titanium (talk) 00:02, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This user needs either a temporary block or a topic ban regarding categories like these. He's being disruptive at this point and has refused to engage in conversation even when others have asked him to. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 00:29, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I also warned the editor in January, which they ignored. I think at the very least a WP:TBAN is needed per WP:COMPETENCE, although such disruptive behavior doesn't give me any confidence that their edits anywhere else will be any less problematic.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 20:05, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I mentioned this at the comics project last year, so I'll bring it up here: I think Cwf97 might be a sock of CensoredScribe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who was banned in 2014. They've been caught socking like 35 times in the last five or six years, and Cwf97's behavior is reminiscent of theirs. JOEBRO64 20:11, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is not something this project talk page can deal with, someone will need to either head to SPI if the evidence is strong for that, or to ANI. Seems pretty obvious the local project group believe action is needed, but ANI needs to make the call. I myself left a final warning of sorts. -- ferret (talk) 22:25, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't here looking for someone to deal with this, I was just mentioning it. JOEBRO64 22:56, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, meant as a general statement to this entire couple of replies, not directed to you specific. -- ferret (talk) 00:27, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Articles for Creation now has a sort tool; you can use it to review Draft video game articles

Just thought some folks here would like to be able to see proposed drafts and weigh in: Wikipedia:AfC_sorting#Culture/Media/Video_games_(20). MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:00, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Worth noting that according to the header at Wikipedia:AfC sorting/Culture/Media/Video games, "Topic predictions are from ORES", not manually sorted, so it's very possible that some of the drafts aren't about video game topics at all. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 06:38, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
While ORES probably is not really good at judging article class for drafts (since it seems to go by the number of sources and length of text without evaluation of quality), the articles in that category seem to be mostly, if not all, related to VG. Not a bad idea imho, allowing people to review drafts based on their expertise. Regards SoWhy 08:05, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just noting it since the first two I checked weren't VG-related :p Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 09:06, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Satellaview games reviewed in Satella Tsuhin, do you have this magazine?

We are looking for people who have this Japanese magazine, or know where it can be found. Wiki project Square Enix wants it to get the original Japanese reviews for the game released on the Satellaview video game system. Or if you know what issue they reviewed it in, that would help too. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:15, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New Articles (May 18 to May 24)

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 v3.4 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 16:04, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 18

  • None

May 19

May 20

May 21

May 22

  • None

May 23

  • None

May 24

Requesting comments

Comments would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xenia (emulator). The discussion currently looks like it will make for a "no consensus" closure, the worst possible outcome. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 19:40, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Dream Focus has ever voted to delete something on a AFD. Anyway, this page absolutely fails the notability criteria, there's two sources and neither of them offer significant coverage that makes the subject notable enough to have its own article. This could easily be mentioned on something like Xbox 360 or what have you. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 20:19, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Wikipedia:Teahouse Question related to video games - Assistance requested.

A Wikipedia:Teahouse discussion has been started revolving around if there's a point to replace 'upcoming' with 'canceled' when a game seems to no longer be under development based off news reports, but has not been officially canceled. Assistance with this question is appreciated. (More information, including the game in question, is available at the Teahouse discussion.)

NOTE: Please go to the Wikipedia:Teahouse discussion to reply, so this conversation occurs in one coherent place. Thank you.--The Navigators (talk) 21:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Inexplicably missing article - Replacement article contains no information of deleted one.

Hi y'all.. Looking for the article The Music of the Gran Turismo series, but it has seeminly vanished and now redirects to the Gran Turismo series page. The new page contains no information of the old one. Could we add info to the new page or regain the old one? Thanks

https://web.archive.org/web/20191111082749/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_of_the_Gran_Turismo_series Archive of the original page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_(series) Current redirect

Miss Zia (talk) 10:19, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was redirected by OceanHok [4] due to it being WP:GAMECRUFT. And from looking at it that seems accurate as it was just a list of songs that appeared in each game with no detail actually of the music like production. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 10:29, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Miss Zia, a carbon copy of that article is hosted on FANDOM, see here. Given the article's content, FANDOM is also the appropriate venue, unlike Wikipedia, as Spy-cicle explains above. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 10:47, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to note that if you needed anything off those pages the redirect's past history is there, but there's nothing salvagable in terms of sourced information (not soundtrack related). --Masem (t) 19:56, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Open source games by genre

I left a note here a week or two ago about the set of genre categories in Category:Open-source video games. I have since started a discussion about the set of categories. Please take a moment to participate. --Izno (talk) 02:37, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Addressing sequels of a game as part of its Legacy

A recurring pattern I've seen in articles for games that are part of a series is that a "Legacy" or "Sequels" section will often list all sequels that came after it, or list off elements that were carried over to future games. Examples I have off the top of my head are the Paper Mario and the Super Smash Bros. games, and a good portion of the Super Mario games. For each one new entry that is released, most previous articles are updated to include or reference that new game.

Something about having to list all the sequels or what elements carried to future ones seems a bit crufty, or leaning into original research. For particular elements or features that a game introduced that heavily influenced later games' design that are covered by reliable sources (like the world map in SMB3), but something like "enemy X now appears in Y games afterward" seems a bit much. It seems redundant to list all future games in a series, as it's obvious it's a series. How should we approach addressing sequels to games in articles or elements carried over to new games in the Legacy section? Nothing in the manual of style jumped out to me, so I'm curious on best approach. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 22:06, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Listing recurring enemies is too much. I haven't looked but a Legacy/Sequel section for Super Mario Bros. could be something like "It's success spawned [however many] direct sequels, Super Mario Bros 2 and Super Mario Bros 3 to positive critical receptions and financial success. Sinec its release, the Super Mario Bros series has developed into a multimedia spanning franchise across animated series, films, comics, toys, etc, etc. A variety of games featuring the Mario Bros have been made, from continuations that embrace the platforming side to deviations such as Dr Mario, that Tetrisy one, and crossovers with Sega icons like Sonic the Hedgehog in the Olympic ones"
I don't know enough about that series to go all in, but it should be detail of the impact it has had, and an overview of appearances in other games. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 22:16, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think the legacy section should address the significant impact a game had on the series, like Mario 3's overworld map. When talking about sequels, I'd mention stuff like what the developers learned from the first game and give a concise (1-2 sentence) summary of the sequel. For instance, a lot of Donkey Kong Country 2 is composed of material that was cut from the first DKC, so that'd definitely merit a mention in the legacy section. JOEBRO64 22:29, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Quickly looking at the SSB page, its Legacy section is just a history of the game's sequels which means its essentially just a summary of the game's series article (it admits as much by linking to that article as the section's main article). That certainly shouldn't be what's covered in a Legacy section and really shouldn't be covered in the game's article at all. The series article exists for a reason. Something more akin to what Joebro gave as examples would be much more appropriate and interesting. --TorsodogTalk 03:35, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding lists

I recently noticed that while we have separate lists for List of Nintendo Entertainment System games and List of Family Computer games the List of Super Famicom games was merged with List of Super Nintendo Entertainment System games in May 2018. Is there any particular reason that they are handled differently or should the Family Computer List be merged like the Super Famicom list was?--69.157.254.64 (talk) 05:17, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games&oldid=959316541"