Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Visual novels/2012-2013

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Reviews

Hello all,

I had a question I thought I'd ask before I start adding more material to an article I'm fixing up. Is using the Anime News Network and Crunchyroll aggegator scores constitute reliable references for citing the overall reception of a series? If not, does anyone know of any that are reliable?

Thanks, Valce Talk 07:12, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Nevermind, found a list! Valce Talk 07:37, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Hoshizora e Kakaru Hashi

Hoshizora e Kakaru Hashi will be the next project I work on, now that I finished with List of School Days episodes. Valce Talk 01:36, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Is there anything needed before the latter is brought before FLC like citing each release date (the most common issue) or copyedit (2nd on the list)? Anyway although, the episode lists aren't part of this projectTF, but good job anyway.Jinnai 01:17, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Black Past literary criticism doujinshi

I was searching for literary sources for To Heart, and I am wondering if the literary criticism doujinshi Black Past (and subsequently the column on the website, which is actually what I am hoping to use) can be considered a reliable SPS. The "appendix" that was released at C81 is mainly concerned about visual novels, and contains various reviews, criticisms, and interviews with people in the industry. Its list of authors apparently include Yūichi Murakami and Shūsei Sakagami, and Kensuke Suzuki, an associate professor in sociology at Kwansei Gakuin University, also contributed a piece. Murakami and Sakagami were both finalists of a literary criticism contest Hiroki Azuma and Kodansha held back in 2008, and Murakami won the contest. Both writers (and pretty much all entrants) also have their entries published on Kodansha's website, so I suppose they are technically published. Is this enough to merit the book and the website as reliable sources?

And I was going to ask this on WT:ANIME, but figured I should ask here instead since this mainly concerns visual novels. -- クラウド668 07:21, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

While I'm no expert on RSs, in the end I believe one of the main ways in determining if a source is reliable is if it's used by other reliable sources. Failing that, proving it has an editing staff behind it, and the writers are knowledgeable in their field (usually shown by their reputation by other reliable sources) is important. I would say it's reliable, but a proper discussion at WP:RS/N would probably be better for future purposes if the question of its reliability ever came up in an article assessment. I'm sure there have been similar instances of web magazines being used as reliable sources in video game articles (or at least discussions regarding them).
On a related note, the visual novel primer by Sakagami is pretty interesting. He has an interesting take in what he refers to as the "Kanon Problem". Funnily enough, I'm playing Kanon right now (finished Nayuki, Shiori, and Mai/Sayuri, and am on Makoto now). His views on all VNs produced after To Heart basically building on what that game did are also very interesting (and something I was already implicitly aware).-- 09:19, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
That's actually what I wanted to cite in To Heart's reception (and legacy?) section, but I'm not really sure whether Sakagami counts as a reliable writer. While Murakami can arguably be considered one because he also had a book published by Kodansha, Sakagami's only other publication is his entry to the contest. -- クラウド668 21:43, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Doing some digging, apparently, as said on his profile at his now defunct blog (though he now has a Twitter account), he was in charge of literature commentary in Weekly Dokushojin, a magazine operated by Dokushojin, which launched in 1958. He was also writing for Contectures with this eroge column (this links to the notice of his first entry, not the entry itself).-- 22:28, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Amazon.co.jp Adult PC Game Best of Scenario poll results

Amazon.co.jp apparently ran a poll on the scenarios of eroge released between 2010 and 2012. Must say it surprised me to see White Album 2 on the top rather than Little Busters! -- クラウド668 02:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Any day is a good day as long as a Key game ranks above a Type-Moon one. And I think you meant eroge sold between 2010 and 2012.-- 02:52, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Dengeki G's Magazine 300th issue bishōjo character poll

Dengeki G's Magazine reached its 300th overall issue with its October 2012 issue. They don't have a poll on games this time around, but they did round up all the counted character votes (25463 in total) between the 200th and 300th issues and listed the top twenty.

  1. Kudryavka Noumi (Little Busters!), 2175 votes
  2. Otome Asakura (Da Capo II), 2070 votes
  3. Kanade Tachibana (Angel Beats!), 1328 votes
  4. Saber (Fate/stay night), 1241 votes
  5. Kotori Shirakawa (Da Capo), 1074 votes
  6. Feena Fam Earthlight (Yoake Mae yori Ruriiro na), 948 votes
  7. Konata Izumi (Lucky Star), 934 votes
  8. Tamaki Kōsaka (To Heart 2), 840 votes
  9. Saya Tokido (Little Busters!), 690 votes
  10. Manaka Komaki (To Heart 2), 654 votes
  11. Fate Testarossa (Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha), 640 votes
  12. Azusa Nakano (K-On!), 635 votes
  13. Kagami Hiiragi (Lucky Star), 633 votes
  14. Shana (Shakugan no Shana), 556 votes
  15. Mio Akiyama (K-On!), 533 votes
  16. Rin Natsume (Little Busters!), 522 votes
  17. Nagisa Furukawa (Clannad), 451 votes
  18. Yui Hirasawa (K-On!), 445 votes
  19. Nanoha Takamachi (Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha), 422 votes
  20. Sakuya (Sister Princess), 412 votes

Needless to say I am disappointed in the lack of Komari from LB!, Multi from To Heart, and Sana from Mashiroiro Symphony in this list. -- クラウド668 04:44, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Dear Esther

Could someone check the latest changes at [1]? Is this game a visual novel (3D western visual novel)?

Santer (talk) 13:42, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Even though I played Dear Esther, it's kind of hard to say. On one hand, it's very much just reading/listening to the randomly chosen text, even though the text only shows up every so often. On the other hand, you do have to walk around and explore the setting, which I think is a trait of the larger adventure genre. I guess if you strictly go by the "text reading" definition, it doesn't count as a visual novel just simply because the emphasis is on the exploration (and looking at things). -- クラウド668 04:16, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Immoral Study non-notable

I've been working on Immoral Study (series) and have been unable to find any sources of information on it other than self-published reviews by fans or product listings in online stores. It just doesn't seem notable enough for Wikipedia and should probably be deleted.--Atlantima (talk) 14:54, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Regarding notability

On February 14, four articles were added to the WP:VN#Articles to work on section into a "To be created" sub-section, but I initially removed them for lack of establishing notability, which I will point out here. First the Grisaia series. There are there games in this series: Grisaia no Kajitsu (2011), Grisaia no Meikyū (2012) and Grisaia no Rakuen (2013). These games did not receive so much as a manga/anime adaptation, and were not released outside Japan. Wikipedia:Notability (video games) states, "A video game is appropriate for an article if it has been the subject of significant commentary or analysis in published sources that are independent of the game developer." A quick Google search turns up official websites, retailing websites, and blogs. Some of the series does get mention in places like Famitsu, such as here and here, but sources such as these don't provide "significant commentary" and thus don't establish notability. Furthermore, searching for Grisia does not uncover any significant coverage in English, which is not surprising since they've never been released outside of Japan.

This same thing can be seen in the next two articles added to the "To be created" sub-section: Sekien no Inganock: What a beautiful people and Sōten no Celenaria: What a beautiful world. Sekien no Inganock was unofficially fan translated into English, but this does not establish notability, and is a breech of copyright. Doing a Google search of Sekien no Inganock uncovers blogs, forums, and various other fan listings. A search of the Japanese title also does not establish any significant coverage in reliable sources. It goes without saying, but the same could be said of Sōten no Celenaria.

Taimanin Asagi, however, did received an anime adaptation, and this may be enough to establish notability, although the OVA, like the game it's based on, does not seem to have been released outside of Japan. Still, notability should be established before any article is suggested to be created, or else we're just going to be creating articles that aren't notable enough for creation and thus liable to get deleted, which seems to be the current fate of the articles in WP:VN#Notability not established, one of which, Immoral Study (series), is already at AFD.-- 06:24, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Grisaia does have some sources on the Internet (via its PSP port) that sorta establishes its notability, not to mention that it got one of those Moe Game Awards a few years back. They've also been planning/working on an anime adaptation since 2010, not that I am sure if that's actually happening anymore. But hey, if the PSP game somehow took two years, so can the anime, right? -- クラウド668 17:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Why only Japanese ones?

Seems strange to restrict it to only Japanese VNs.--75.92.61.32 (talk) 13:55, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Well, when this taskforce was created about 6 years ago, the scope was partly patterned off of WP:ANIME#Project scope, specifically the first bullet of WP:ANIME#What topics we do not cover. However, I suppose the scope is a bit outdated and should be updated to include non-Japanese works as well.-- 22:32, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
I updated the scope section.--Atlantima (talk) 22:25, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Dumb boilerplate descriptions in most articles

There are countless VN articles with variations on this text in "Gameplay" or "Plot": "The gameplay of game follows a branching/linear plot line which offers pre-determined scenarios with courses of interaction, and focuses on the appeal of the number female main characters by the player character."... "One of the goals of the gameplay is for the player to view the hentai scenes depicting the protagonist and the heroines having sexual intercourse."

  • Vague term: "pre-determined scenarios": As opposed to what? Scenarios that are written as the player is playing?
  • Vague term: "courses of interaction": What does that even mean? If it means the characters converse and interact with the player character, then that's pretty much any game with NPCs.
  • Confusing grammar: "the appeal of the female main characters by the player character." I know this is supposed to mean that the player character is meant to like the heroines, but it sure is worded awkwardly. Is this construction used anywhere else in English? Do we say that "Joe is dating Susan because of the appeal of Susan by Joe"?
  • Undue weight on sexual aspects: "One of the goals of the gameplay is for the player to view the hentai scenes depicting the protagonist and the heroines having sexual intercourse." From what I know of how people play VNs, the goals vary from player to player. Some may want to view all the scenes (hentai or not). Some may want to only get their favorite character's ending. Some may only want to get the good ends. Some may specifically skip past sex scenes, for whatever reason. Sure, the sex scenes are in there and some, perhaps most, players make a goal of viewing them. But putting this phrase in every adult VN article is like putting parts in the articles for Fable games saying "One of the goals of the gameplay is for the player to listen to the audio files of the player character and their partner having sexual intercourse." Yeah, it's something you can do, but to call it a goal is odd.

It's especially weird when that boilerplate text is there but no actual storyline is described. (e.g. Sanarara, FairlyLife, Daitoshokan no Hitsujikai). Who the heck came up with these phrases and decided to put them everywhere? --Atlantima (talk) 22:15, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

First of all, they're not in every article. Indeed, the more recently released games don't use much of this language. Take Daitoshokan no Hitsujikai. No where does it say that viewing the sex scenes is a "goal" of the game. Yes, this was a problem in earlier articles, and those articles do need to be updated, but it's not put in more recent VN articles.
Second, you're interpretation of "appeal" is wrong. The sentence is meant to convey not that the player likes the girls (indeed, I'm sure many players find certain characters annoying), but instead conveys that the player has to get the girls to like them in order to advance the story and thus the gameplay. In other words, it could say, "...and focuses on getting the number female main characters to like the player character."
Third, "pre-determined scenarios" was to point out that VNs have multiple scenarios/routes that the player gets to play through. In conventional games, there will be one scenario that the player goes through from beginning to end, but VNs have multiple scenarios, so this needs to be pointed out somehow. Perhaps it could be worded better, though. As for "courses of interaction", this points out the fact that the game has portions which require the player to make choices, thus "interacting" with the game. VNs are a form of interactive fiction, so explicitly stating "interaction" makes sense.
Fourth, for a time VNs were described as having "linear" plotlines, but in more recent games, it's been corrected as branching.
Anyway, the basic structure of a VN is always the same, so it makes sense to use the same gameplay summary for all VN articles (or something similar, as in School Days (visual novel)#Gameplay) with exceptions added for additional gameplay, including minigames, restrictions on routes that are unlocked, etc.-- 23:25, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
To answer that last part about storylines not being described in the gameplay section, Atlantima, I think that's something that should be left for the Plot section, unless it has to do with the gameplay.
But yeah, visual novels more often than not has exactly the same basic gameplay (reading the text and making choices), and since there are only the few of us working on visual novel articles, naturally a lot of the articles use a modified version of the same gameplay summary. Also, to answer "who the heck came up with these phrases," I believe the version of the gameplay section used in Daitoshokan is based on the one that Juhachi wrote for Koichoco, which I suppose was based on the one I had for To Heart 2, which I expanded from the version in True Tears, which is heavily based on (read: ripped off of) the gameplay section Juhachi had for Kanon circa 2008. -- クラウド668 06:23, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
In addition, the gameplay section in Kanon circa 2008 was based on the gameplay section in Ef: A Fairy Tale of the Two., which was itself a result of its two GA reviews in late 07/early 08, which was originally based on an earlier gameplay section in Kanon circa 2007, which was based on the gameplay section in Shuffle!, the very first VN GA on Wikipedia (to my knowledge).-- 06:50, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I interpreted the "appeal" sentence incorrectly. That just proves my point about the confusingness of the phrase. Why not just say "player has to win the girls' favor to advance the story", instead of "focuses on the appeal of the female main characters by the player character"? (not to mention that you can't blanketly say that all story progression will always be result of romantic appeal, anyway.)

pre-determined scenarios" was to point out that VNs have multiple scenarios/routes that the player gets to play through. Well if one means "multiple scenarios" then one should say "multiple scenarios". Saying "pre-determined" is extraneous.

As for "courses of interaction", this points out the fact that the game has portions which require the player to make choices, thus "interacting" with the game. VNs are a form of interactive fiction, so explicitly stating "interaction" makes sense. Uh I wasn't objecting to the word "interaction" but the phrase "courses of interaction". Maybe this is a real phrase used by some people but it sounds strange to me. Why not say "interacting with characters" or "conversing with characters"?

for a time VNs were described as having "linear" plotlines, but in more recent games, it's been corrected as branching. Eh, there are still linear VNs. Not all are branching. And I have no problem with mentioning when they are are linear or branching.

To answer that last part about storylines not being described in the gameplay section, Atlantima, I think that's something that should be left for the Plot section, unless it has to do with the gameplay. I'm not saying that plot should be in the gameplay section. I'm saying that there is sometimes literally no description of the plot anywhere in the article. It appears like lazy editors copypasted the standard gameplay text when they could have written something that was actually specifically about that game: the story.--Atlantima (talk) 22:30, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, with the player has to win the girls' favor to advance the story, it doesn't say who these girls are, or how they pertain to the story, so it's kind of vague. Something like the "player has to win the favor of the number female main characters to advance the story" is what I would go with.
I'd say you're right about the "pre-determined" bit; it should just be multiple.
I still feel you're missing the point of "courses of interaction". It's not just that the player is talking/interacting/conversing with characters, as this happens in any game with more than one character. The point is that the player gets to choose the outcome of the story with the choices provided. I suppose it could say "The gameplay in game follows an interactive branching plot line with multiple scenarios."
Ah, yeah. I got confused about the linear/branching thing. A long time ago, it was conventional to refer to all VNs as having "linear plot lines"; naturally, there are games like Planetarian or Umineko that offer no choices.
As for the last thing about the copypasted gameplay, it's not wrong to put in the standard gameplay for a game before it's plot, when most VNs share the same general structure. Wikipedia is a work in progress, so naturally you try to put in what you can when you can; there's no set order to these things. Sometimes, the story is not easy to write.-- 01:42, 8 April 2013 (UTC)