Template talk:Megami Tensei series

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Video games (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template 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.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

Can we get a readable template?[edit]

I'm curious as to what was wrong with this template that it had to be reverted to the cluttered mess it is now.

I realize there is standardized template forms, but they aren't a 'one size fits all' solution. The Megaten series of games is composed of a handful of different sub-series, and I think it is important to separate them in the template, in a readable fashion. We already do this for other series (the Mega Man and DDR templates come to mind off the top of my head) so why is it not alright to have sub-sections for this series? --Captain Cornflake 07:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Navboxes, basically. Not all of the templates have yet been cleaned up; the Mega Man template is still in the process of being split into smaller groups, and the DDR template is such a mess I don't know where to start to clean it up. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


Any reason as to why SMT: IMAGINE and SMT: NINE aren't on there? Kirbysuperstar 07:05, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Spin Offs[edit]

The Imagine and NINE games should be on the template along with the Majin Tensei games and the Last Bible games. It'll help make the template cover the entire series (considering it is already covering Spin Offs like the Devil Summoner series.) EditingMachine 08:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

No. Imagine and NINE are both considered to be better succession of the SMT series than Nocturne in Japanese (Asian) fandom. Due to their story and background are essentially, directly connected to SMT 1 and 2. -- Sameboat - 同舟 08:16, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Regardless of what Japanese fans think, the games are still spin-offs. --Serph 04:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


I decategorized the template from the "Category: Megami Tensei": I'm pretty sure navigation templates are not supposed to be placed in the game series category. Also, the template was placed in a discussion page so the category listed the talk page too. I could be wrong though.. — Blue 06:30, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

It's conventional among these templates to be categorized in its game series category. The category tag only needs to be written within the <noinclude> to avoid unintended categorization when transcluded by other articles. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 07:06, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Actually that was what I was looking for. I stand corrected. — Blue 05:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

cleanup and reorganization[edit]

This template could use some cleanup. I already removed the red links as they have been around sometime and should be avoided in navigation templates. At the very least, the main series should be listed on top with "main series" header to conform with other video game templates. Other series should be merged into appropriate lists. Also given the number of series, we may wish to broadly group games and other media differently for easier clarification...or split the other media off.Jinnai 07:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Listing categorization[edit]

Although the discussion may be brought out too early, I have some thoughts reguading the legitimacy for games to be included in the Shin Megami Tensei section. IMAGINE is canonically connected with SMT1 and 2 but not 3:Nocturne. if... is merely a spin-off and have nothing to do with either SMT1 and 2, it is listed alongside them due to the fallacy that if... shares almost the same engine and graphics from SMT2 and never got the chance to be released outside of JP. 3:Nocturne is a numbered SMT game in JP, even though the connections with SMT1 and 2 are so tiny or indirect, this should not be challenged anyway.

So I suggest moving if... out of the SMT group. Retaining Imagine and Strange Journey in the spin-off group. While this is mere guessing, Strange Journey is not likely to be a canonical installment of the traditional (SMT1,2,Imagine) SMT world. The synopsis of the scan hints the role of this game is similar to Devil Survivor or Digital Devil Saga, particularly the former. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 15:19, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

What does Atlus have to say about it? They would be the best to go by. If they list it as a SMT title, then that's how we should. If not, well we can move it to other game sections.Jinnai 19:00, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

What about going by the chronology in the Famitsu article for Strange Journey? [1] It includes SMT1-3(and Maniax), if..., and Strange Journey. NINE and Imagine aren't really Atlus games. -- jj984jj

For the record, that chronology box listed the first SMT, SMT II, SMT if... , SMT III Nocturne and SMT III Nocturne Maniax. There's no Strange Journey in there. — Blue 07:04, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
That's not a chronological timeline for the in-game world but a publication timeline. NINE is excluded probably due to its extremely weak sale. (IMAGINE is excluded either because technically the core program isn't developed by Atlus R&D1 department itself.) -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 02:31, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Using the logo to determine a title being part of the main series isn't quite right considering most spinoffs like Devil Children and the first Devil Summoner also uses the same logo, IMHO. — Blue 07:13, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
I know, the chronology is suppose to lead up to Strange Journey, I snipped it of the article for Strange Journey in Famitsu. Basically it includes titles designed and developed by Atlus, unlike NINE and Imagine, which were outsourced. I agree using the logo alone doesn't constitute a game as part of the series, Atlus decided to make Devil Summoner its own series and differentiated it from Shin Megami Tensei from the second installment and the Devil Children games were also all outsourced. jj984jj 15:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jj984jj (talkcontribs)

Atlus confirms the history of Shin Megami Tensei. [2] jj984jj (talk) 04:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

SJ is in main SMT series then? NINE isn't mentioned in there. There's mention of Persona and Devil Summoner being offshoots tho. — Blue 10:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Seems like it, I think the current template would be fine if SJ was moved up to the Shin Megami Tensei section, but what about the Main series section? Should Megami Tensei really be referred to as the Main series? Atlus will never make another Digital Devil Story game, I think that section should be Megami Tensei or Digital Devil Story and there should be no Main series section. -- jj984jj (talk) 22:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Unless Atlus says another series is their "main series" the original is always the main series. The most I've seen to that effect is Persona being ramped up to possibly become a flagship series.Jinnai 22:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
I dunno about Atlus saying the Megami Tensei is the Main series, since they've been concentrating on Shin Megami Tensei for quite some time. Although IMHO Main series could be renamed Digital Devil Story instead since that's the full title. — Blue 05:21, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
That is the definition of a main series as other series are spinoff series.Jinnai 05:46, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
It's weird because pretty much everything is called Shin Megami Tensei at this point. Although, that may only be in the US/Europe; some of the games in Japan don't carry the SMT prefix (the Persona series, I believe, maybe also DDS). It doesn't make any of them "official" SMT games; that's confined to I, II, III, if..., and now SJ it would seem.
Are there any other examples in game series to point to? I wouldn't be opposed to changing Main series to Megami Tensei series (here and at List of Megami Tensei media), because there's a good chance Atlus will never release a "Megami Tensei" game ever again. There are decent marketing reasons not to, anyway. The proper "Shin Megami Tensei" series is arguably their main series now, although they continue to develop games for all their spin-off franchises (Persona, Raidou, DDS maybe). That's not to say that SMT should be called the main series, though. --gakon5 (talk) 20:04, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Template:Baldur's Gate is probably the closest. In this case we could change main to original.Jinnai 21:22, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that's the language I used when creating the Media page. "Original" is more precise than "Main" in this case. The Megami Tensei games are indeed the original two games, but they are no longer the main series. --gakon5 (talk) 20:54, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
I'd be find with original. Right now I'd say Persona is their main series. I would have to find the press release that said they were going to make it their flagship series. If it were, I'm not sure how to deal with it then because it's almost unheard of for a spinoff series to become the flagship...in fact it make be unprecedented for any commercially published game (there are some exceptions with dojin soft).Jinnai 05:14, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't think Atlus will ever publicly "play favorites" with their game series, but Persona is what sells, which has me a bit worried. Persona 5 is supposedly in the works, but when do they stop?
Not declaring a "main series" should be fine. While some SMT spinoffs have prospered (Persona) and some have fell off (the super-old ones, like Majin Tensei), the concepts and themes of them all point back to the original games. --gakon5 (talk) 19:55, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

List of media / Category[edit]

The use of "List of Media - Category" is seen on a few of the major game series templates ({{Metal Gear series}} {{Grand Theft Auto}} {{Battlefield series}} {{Call of Duty series}}), which is why I added it to this one. If there's no standard, maybe one should be established. --gakon5 (talk) 01:44, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Media is probably appropriate (although I disagree with "list of"), but I disagree with Category as otherwise category should be on lesser known titles like Rune Factory or Popotan. We don't usually link to categories in an article, except in the categories section. However, if you want this can be brought to WT:VG so we can try to figure out a standard.Jinnai 01:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Category does seem dubious, but I think "Media" can at least be written as "List of media." "Media" alone seems a bit ambiguous to me. --gakon5 (talk) 02:04, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Idea for new line on this template box[edit]

Since there have been several Category:Megami Tensei anime, would it be good to add mention of these to the box so people can click on them? In some cases these only direct so sections on articles about the games (anime did not get their own articles, but have details listed) so I'm not sure, because it seems relevant if people are interested, especially since we can list unique titles like "Trinity Soul" or "Light and Dark". DB (talk) 23:02, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Naming the field for TV series/films[edit]

My use of the term "anime" was reverted because apparently it's not understood by the general public. I think the current term "media" is needlessly vague when all of the media is anime. Would the term "animation" be a reasonable compromise? --Mika1h (talk) 14:48, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, I guess Animation works. While we're at it can you push the 'Original Series', 'Shin Megami Tensei' and 'Other games' Sections down one under a 'Video Games' header? While it stands, those three headers don't exactly help explain to the average reader what the links are. See how Template:Bleach is general. I would do it but I'm unfamiliar with formatting a template like this. —KirtZMessage 17:28, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Should we put the four series (Devil Summoner, Persona, Digital Devil Saga, Devil Survivor) under "Shin Megami Tensei"? They are not Shin Megami Tensei in Japan and Persona seems to have dropped the title in the West after Persona 4. Also a subgroup within a subgroup might make it a bit confusing. --Mika1h (talk) 18:04, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. It looks fine now, we don't need to get too specific in a template, especially since Persona seems to have dropped it. Anyone interested should understand when they visit an article or they may not notice it in the template all together. —KirtZMessage 23:03, 22 March 2014 (UTC)