Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 174

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 170←Archive 172Archive 173Archive 174Archive 175Archive 176Archive 177

Goals

If you check out the main WPVG page right now, you can see that we've hit our goal of 10% of articles B-Class or better, and at 99.7% are almost at another goal of 75% of articles Start-Class or better. Congratulations to all of us who improved articles over the past years! So, it's time to consider replacing them with new goals. For some ideas, see previous discussions here and here.

It feels like only yesterday that we set these goals... it wasn't, of course, because as the invisible comments tell us at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/goals, that B-class goal started at 1597/3093.5 (51.62%) in September 2014, and the Start-class goal started at 15039/22526.25 (66.76%) in January 2014. They were ambitious, long-term goals. The other two were started in November 2020, and will probably also take a decade to finish. I'd like to recommend as a result that we try, if possible, to pick new goals that are achievable in less time, even if that means they're more esoteric, though just "next round number%" is also ok. --PresN 14:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

The zhwp WPVG has a set of goals (translation) which is similar to our goals:
  • 5 Good or Featured Topics
  • 5% of articles B-Class or better
  • High/Top-Importance articles basically reach C-Class
  • 1250 DYKs
The last goal seems newness. We have 1,389 DYKs and promote ~10 DYKs monthly, thus 1,500 DYKs (around one year) might be OK. But I'm not sure is there a DYK push custom...--For Each element In group Next (talk) 15:38, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
I'll be honest I've always been semi-disinterested in DYKs because I don't really get the purpose they serve.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:07, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
May I suggest a goal to clean out some of our backlogs, namely the screenshot and cover art backlogs? (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:18, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
User:DocFreeman24 has been doing this. Timur9008 (talk) 13:16, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
From what I can tell, his edits over the past few months are mainly cover art and not screenshots. A goal or even a drive would help significantly with the almost 9k backlog. detriaskies 18:28, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes this is right, I’ve been mostly focused on cover art so if someone wanted to do screenshots that would be a great addition. Also I’d be more likely to do screenshots if there was an upload tool for screenshots the way there is for cover art. The upload tool makes it sooooo much easier than the manual process. DocFreeman24 (talk) 23:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Other goals to throw out there as ideas: <=7500 stubs (we've dropped ~1000 a year for the past 2 years, are at 8906 right now); 300+ FAs (we're at 268 and have been doing about 8/year recently); all Vital Level-5 video game articles C+ (17/175 are starts) or B+ (58/175 are start/C). --PresN 21:00, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Those all sound like good ideas. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:38, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
We could try getting all Top-Importance articles to B-Class or better. We are currently halfway there, since 30 of the 61 articles are C-Class and none are Start-Class or Stub-Class. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:55, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
I like the ideas from QuicoleJR and PresN. Let's balance a few goals that reduce our lowest quality articles, and a few goals that increase our highest quality articles. Shooterwalker (talk) 20:09, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, so, the proposed options are:

  1. <=7500 stubs
  2. 300+ FAs
  3. Vital Level-5 video game articles C+
  4. Vital Level-5 video game articles B+
  5. Top-Importance articles to B+
  6. Clear cover art backlog
  7. Clear screenshot backlog

Can we get a vote where everyone picks two options, and then I'll swap in the winners when we pass our 75% start goal? --PresN 15:55, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Lots of good options, so just picking 2 is tough. I'll go 2 and 3. -- ZooBlazer 16:05, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
After consideration, I go with 1 and 3. --ProtoDrake (talk) 16:16, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
I'm thinking 2 and 5, with 3 as a very close third. I pick 5 over 3 because it is much less prone to changing, although I like both as goals. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:21, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
  • The problem with that one is that we're currently over 5% with 2428, but thousands from 10%. And just going to an even 2500 would be done in 3 months at our current rapid GA pace. --PresN 17:50, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
1 and 6 TarkusABtalk/contrib 17:30, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
3 and 7. (Oinkers42) (talk) 17:33, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
5 and 7 here. Another possible goal is dealing with the former featured gaming articles. Roughly about 34 articles, and some pretty high-importance ones too like the NES. detriaskies 17:50, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
I believe reducing the amount of low-quality articles should take priority, and out of these I think 1 and 3 will accomplish that most expediently, so they get my vote. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 17:57, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
I believe 1 and 3 benefits readers the most. It can be overwhelming to see how many 90s/2000s game articles are just awful looking stubs. Sergecross73 msg me 18:29, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
My vote is going to 1 and 3 per what others have said. I'm also already working (or planning) on de-stubbing some articles, so 1 falls in line. λ NegativeMP1 18:37, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
I'm gonna go with 1 and then either 6 or 7. Getting rid of the large image backlogs would be neat. CaptainGalaxy 20:26, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
6 and 7. GamerPro64 22:36, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
2 and 6. Skyshiftertalk 23:11, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
1 and 2. I think dealing with stubs and getting more FAs are the two most important things to do in the project, as we have numerous articles that are either very close to being Start-class or simply not notable. 1 is also something that could easily be coordinated; for example, let's say that 10 users agree to focus on one letter each, doing what they can to figure out which articles are notable and improving them to at least Start-class. It wouldn't be a quick process, but it'd be a gradual one that doesn't take much effort for each individual stub. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 23:39, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
1 and 6. I think this is the most important in terms of what readers will be looking for, especially 1. ― novov (t c) 07:03, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Seeking additional input on a draft to improve Pokemon by generation lists

I proposed changes here, with a draft here. If anyone could weigh in on what changes are good and what are bad, that'd be wonderful. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 22:26, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't love the [show] tags for every section. It's an accessibility concern and also it's just annoying to click on each one to view the content. I also agree with Mable's comment that losing the coloring/sorting by type is a shame. Axem Titanium (talk) 00:13, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
While color should not be used in BG colors like that (particularly with those not being web-friendly colors) there is nothing against adding a color swatch associated with the types using {{color sample}}. You still are conveying info by text but providing a secondary means that is within accessibility allowances. — Masem (t) 00:31, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Oh I think I quite like the {color sample} idea. I have to agree that using "[show]" is not great here. The tables are about a 100 to 150 entries long and most descriptions are pretty short, so I think it works fine to just have the text there. An overly long description should just be an invitation to remove the cruft until you still have enough to break it out into a new article. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:44, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
I proposed another version on the talk page. --PresN 11:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Cominy ended its Famitsu service yesterday

While I was searching for a Famitsu score on a video game, I came upon a message that says (translated from Japanese): "The game fan SNS "Cominy", which has been operating since 2011, has ended its service as of March 19, 2024. We would like to express our sincere gratitude to the many customers who have used our service since its launch." That means that all of the Famitsu scoring that had been on the page since 2011 has since vanished from existence on all its links for old video games, and now I can't search for scores below "75" anymore. That means no more old Famitsu scores anymore. Now what? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 16:01, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Do you think we should try checking for archived versions of the pages? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:21, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
I think so. Angeldeb82 (talk) 22:45, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

GT/FT projects for Nintendo franchises

Given my frequent mentions of a potential project to make some Nintendo franchises a good or featured topic, I've been thinking: which franchise (such as Mario, Kirby, Splatoon, etc.) should we consider making a GT/FT at the present? Thanks. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Not a franchise, but: this. The Virtual Boy GT is almost half GA/FL. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:52, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
The fanboy in me wants to say Kirby, but we are actually quite close to completing a Metroid Games GT. I would recommend working on that one. Other than that, a smaller series like Splatoon or Wii Sports would be much easier than a larger series like Mario or Zelda since there will be less articles we would have to work on. QuicoleJR (talk) 22:00, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Not a whole franchise, but if each Pokémon generation list gets to FL, it could become a FT with List of Pokémon. It was briefly brought up a couple months ago, but not much progress has been made yet. -- ZooBlazer 22:21, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
The Year of Luigi, and the collection of Mario role playing games, are both close to becoming good topics. I'm tracking their progress here, since both are on my radar. Panini! • 🥪 03:09, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Category:Video games featuring male protagonists

Thoughts on this category? This has been popping up on my watchlist quite a lot recently. I feel like we could tag the vast majority of game articles with this, so it's not exactly defining. IceWelder [✉] 19:33, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Seems WP:NONDEF to me. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:13, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
It's a weird case where the female counterpart has some point given the discussion so "obviously there has to be a male one". The female-led one ultimately would be better off as a list than a category though.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:27, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
VGs featuring female protagonists is clearly defining, as well as any disenfranchised group (like non Caucasian, gay, etc). If you pick a video game at random it will feature a white, straight, make protagonist, which is why those cats are non defining. Masem (t) 21:00, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Oh I'm not defending the category, I agree it's non-defining. I was just replying at the time the possible logic behind it, which is pretty weak.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:02, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Agree it's non-defining (even assuming total gender parity you're classifying... half of all video games?) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 20:31, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Agree it's not defining. It didn't help that it was also being applied pretty...loosely...by an IP editor that has now been blocked too. Sergecross73 msg me 20:47, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
I also agree it's a WP:NONDEF category. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:49, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

If Category:Video games featuring female protagonists exists, I don't see why Category:Video games featuring male protagonists shouldn't, tbh. Skyshiftertalk 20:53, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

The standard here is WP:DEFINING, not "all categories need an equivalent" or "we need parity across category types". Try not to fall into that trap. Sergecross73 msg me 21:00, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
See, just to weigh in, I'm not even really certain that we need either category. Looking at the female category, it has a whopping 2,000+ entries. Just looking at one example, Abyss Odyssey doesn't even mention gender in the article. The category doesn't seem to venture too deep into iffy definitions, thankfully, I just wonder how many articles in it have any commentary on the presence of a female protagonist. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 21:14, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
I'm leaning toward this conclusion as well. I think KFM's suggestion for a list (or even an article?) is a good one. Games that were notable in some way for featuring a female protagonist, not the mere presence of (at least one) female playable character. I'm not suggesting that sexism/patriarchy is over, but with 2000+ entries, I don't think the category is helping anyone navigate at this point. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:25, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
I agree with deleting both categories as well as Category:Video games with gender-selectable protagonists. Games with gender-selectable protagonists are usually written as gender-neutral as possible, making the protagonist's gender even less defining. QuietCicada chirp 00:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Since there seems to be confusion, the "female protagonists" category exists because a lack of female protagonists in games has been widely cited as a problem. See: Gender representation in video games#As player characters. People have never said there are too few male characters, so it is not defining in the same way, and both don't need to exist. The gender select one has been kept in deletion discussions a couple times, citing the fact that gender selects can sometimes be defining for a game, like in Mass Effect for example. I personally think 95% of the games there are non-defining, but there doesn't seem to be a huge chance of it being deleted? ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:50, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Most people would agree women are underrepresented, sure, as equal numbers would put them at slightly over 50% of all protagonists. There is also great disparity in how they are portrayed (sexualization, infantilization, etc.). But those are very different issues from whether this lack of parity or over abundance of trope-y characterizations make the category defining per policy. Basically every JRPG that has more than one character going back to the 1980s has a female protagonist or five. Every fighting game going back 35 years includes female protagonists. A ton of modern indie games have female protagonists. The list goes on and on (over 2,000 apparently if Wikipedia categorization is a guide). We can both fight for better representation and acknowledge that a category containing thousands of games with little in common isn’t really redressing any past or present representation issues. Indrian (talk) 03:06, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and nominated the "male characters" category for deletion as obviously non-defining, but if people think both should be removed, they can weigh in as well. The male one, however, will likely have to go regardless of what the decision is as it simply doesn't make sense in light of why the category is there. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:09, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Ultrakill

I could use another set of eyes at Ultrakill. I'm already at my three reverts. Newish user keeps pushing their revision. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:19, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Kotaku de-prioritizing news

Kotaku EIC Resigns Over New Editorial Edict: "Jen Glennon, who took over as editor in chief of Kotaku in October, resigned Thursday. In a resignation letter seen by Aftermath, Glennon says that she made this choice due to the management team’s recent decision to deprioritize news in favor of guides."

There is no indication that former news and reviews and non-guide articles previously published will vanish, but I've seen some fears that—as has been with many other sites in this digital media death spiral—that it might eventually start happening. It's currently anxiety, though justified anxiety, but I would recommend keeping an eye out on any Kotaku articles we're currently using or that are useful and make sure they're archived with some service or multiple. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 22:18, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Kotaku has and even recently still does top-notch reporting work (e.g. [1]), in spite of god-awful corporate decisions coming from leafy green CEOs. Please archive your Kotaku sources proactively. The writers are not to blame for the declining quality and hopefully most of them get out of there to a more stable position soon. Axem Titanium (talk) 00:04, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
I saw this too. Thanks for bringing it up here. Good thing to keep an eye on. Sergecross73 msg me 00:04, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Diablo IV release date

It has come to my attention that June 5 is the stated release date on the Diablo IV page. However, every other major publication has reported June 6 as the "official" release date, including the website quoted in the article. Blizzard themselves state, "Are you ready for June 6", and follow it up by specifying the timezone in which the game launches. Can others please weigh in on this page and fix it? It seems like a critical mistake to make for a page that will continue to be among the highest-viewed for a long time to come. Venky64 (talk) 16:19, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I replied on the talk page, but as the article prose already denotes, with source from Blizzard, Blizzard changed the release date to June 5. -- ferret (talk) 16:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Seems simple enough. Either way, this hardly strikes me as a "critical error" when its a single day and it released almost 10 months ago. Not a huge deal in the big picture of things... Sergecross73 msg me 16:35, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Reminder: GDC Flickr

A reminder that with GDC going on this week, their photostream on Flickr uploads everything (still) under a free license compable CC-BY-2.0 license, so this is a good source for developer images, if you can verify identities. This is usually better for the awards night (Thursday) but you can sometimes get a good image of a person lecturing a room, for example. — Masem (t) 01:25, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Are any Nintendo folk I'd be interested in using going to be there? Panini! • 🥪 04:19, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
You can search the schedule here and there are a few Nintendo ppl that will be there, but no names I immediately recognize. Masem (t) 04:24, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Ooh, Takashi Tezuka! His infobox image is long overdue. Panini! • 🥪 04:38, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep in mind that the photograph doesn't spend time at every session, through big recognized names that would draw a room, they will be at.
But again, at the awards, they generally photograph every winner and most of the attending nominees, which is why that's a more sure spot. Masem (t) 04:51, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
I don’t know who accepted the awards for Tears of the Kingdom − maybe you can recognize him? See File:Game Developers Choice Awards 2024 - Best Technology - The Legend of Zelda Tears of the Kingdom - 03.jpg Jean-Fred (talk) 23:08, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Guy on the right looks like Takuhiro Dohta, the technical director. --Mika1h (talk) 23:49, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
It sure does, and it makes sense that the technical director would be accepting the technology award. Pictures in commons:Category:Takuhiro Dohta. Thanks!
(Per the livestream, the guy on the left was doing the translation) Jean-Fred (talk) 08:56, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Inviting participation in merge discussions

There are a lot of merge discussions going on right now that have had little to no discussion, including multiple cases where there was no merge discussion at all, just the proposal to merge. I would appreciate anyone who is interested/able to weigh in on the following articles: Jane's US Navy Fighters 97 Bethesda Game Studios Austin Home video game console generations Amazon Lumberyard Transformers Autobots/Transformers Decepticons - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 23:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

April 3 TFA

Jaguar wants to pull PlayStation (console) from the April 3 TFA Main Page slot. We'll need a substitute, probably from WP:Featured articles that haven't been on the Main Page#Video gaming. If anyone's got a suggestion, I'll also need your suggestion for the points that should be highlighted in the blurb. - Dank (push to talk) 19:12, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

4X has been a Featured article since 2008. Maybe nows a good time to put it on the front page. GamerPro64 04:52, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Some anniversaries: Daytona USA (30th anniversary), Toys for Bob (35 years since foundation) --Mika1h (talk) 11:19, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Looking quickly: Daytona USA checks all the boxes. (Comments?) The 30th anniversary of Civnet is next year ... that might be the closest thing that 4X has to an anniversary, would that work for you GamerPro? - Dank (push to talk) 12:52, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Works perfectly. GamerPro64 00:32, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
My only comment is to suggest for Doom (2016 video game) to be TFA in February in honor of Vami if possible. I don't have much involvement with TFA coordination but, if someone can put that in. -- ferret (talk) 13:46, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
That one is on for May ... see WP:Today's featured article/requests/Doom (2016 video game). - Dank (push to talk) 13:55, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Ah if its already running that is fine. :) -- ferret (talk) 14:38, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Ninja Gaiden (arcade game)

I noticed just now in the info box published by Atari for North America, however Atari Lynx games, didn't have US or EU formatting and were released world wide. So doesn't that need correcting? What too? Govvy (talk) 18:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Cross post for opinions, please reply there: Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions#Template:Internet_Archive_game. Also briefly discussed in Discord before this. -- ferret (talk) 18:34, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

New Articles (March 18 to March 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 v3.18 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 14:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

March 18

March 19

March 20

March 21

March 22

March 23

March 24

GT scope question

Hi. Question for the project. I've become something of a Vanillaware fan and have all their game/developer articles except Unicorn Overlord (and including Princess Crown and Grand Kingdom) up to GA after a long period. I'm planning on nominating Unicorn Overlord sometime next month, and if that passes nominating Vanillaware and its game as a Good Topic. Out of the games they have definitively worked on, there's one that I'm not sure I could include or not, and that's Fantasy Earth Zero. It was partly developed by them, and I've included it on their developer article, but would it be includable in a good topic? ProtoDrake (talk) 21:18, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I am of the opinion that the fact that the developer seemed to eventually become Vanillaware, rather than being one company whose staff went on to create Vanillaware, it would make it fitting. Unless I'm misreading, of course. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 21:28, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
My two cents in this regard is that FEZ does belong in under the Vanillaware topic (despite the name change from Purugaru to Vanillaware). Roberth Martinez (talk) 00:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Nominate Disaster Mind for an article?

HI, I can not play video games, but I think this would be a good one to have an article on as it is a FEMA based game [2] Disaster Mind is a video game that has been developed in conjunction with the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Targeted for teens but anyone can use the simulation to get an understanding of what needs to be considered and how best to take necessary precautions to stay safe. reviewed in [3] LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 19:41, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

The correct place is WP:VG/R, but note there is usually an extremely low chance it will be made an article unless you create it yourself.
It also needs to pass WP:GNG guidelines, and in a cursory search, it got no reviews. Simply wanting to advertise a game is not sufficient to have an article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:26, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Metal Gear Solid (1998 video game)

Metal Gear Solid (1998 video game) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. λ NegativeMP1 05:21, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

The Core Contest

Since the WP:VITAL articles were brought up a couple weeks ago (it was me) in regards to potential new goals (which I'm waiting on that last 0.2% on the Start+ goal to finish before swapping over), I thought I'd call out that WP:The Core Contest is starting again for April 15—May 31. It's a contest for improving articles in the VITAL list, which, though a little arbitrary, roughly corresponds to Wikipedia's most important articles. We have one level-3 article (video game), three level-4 articles (video game console, Pokémon, and Tetris) (not the ones I'd pick), and 171 level-5 articles. Of those, 17 are Start-class, and 41 are C-class. So, if you've been thinking "gee, I'd like to work on a more "important"/"foundational"/"notable", yet maybe more difficult, article this year", this is a great time to give it a shot! Unlike other contests, it's not about getting it to GA/FA, it's just about making it better. You just submit your diff of the changes, and the judges nod in appreciation and maybe give you prizes. Give it a shot! --PresN 22:59, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Mario is a level 4 vital article as well; also not one I'd pick. Panini! • 🥪 01:39, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
WP:VITAL is a very arbitrary project designed by a relatively small group of people, but if it inspires people to improve some of our most important articles, then that's great! If you think a subject is more important than a project like VITAL gives it credit for, then the best way to prove how important it is to you is by bringing it to GA or FA quality! Which "high-importance" articles would you all think would be important representations of our Wikiproject and worth bringing to GA/FA? ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:34, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

New Articles (March 25 to March 31)

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 v3.19 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 22:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

March 25

March 26

March 27

March 28

March 29

March 30

March 31

Changelog: Now tagging articles that were previously drafts or userpages as being AfC submissions or moved to article space by the original creator, if applicable. --PresN 22:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Category that needs deletion

I noticed that Category:Video games featuring male protagonists was non admin closed as delete on the 28th of March but had not actually been deleted yet over six days later. Can an administrator please do the honours since I’m assuming the lack of deletion is an oversight? 67.70.101.200 (talk) 01:54, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

I see you're referring to this discussion and . Yes, you are correct, it should be deleted. While its pretty open and shut, I'd still prefer someone else performs it since I was a participant in the discussion. Sergecross73 msg me 17:24, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
I tagged it with speedy G6 using {{Db-xfd}} since it was closed as delete but not implemented. In the future, feel free to tag things that have closed as delete through a consensus process (AFD, CFD, etc.) in this manner. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Sakura Wars

So, back in March, the localized title for the Sakura Wars PS2 remake was changed from "To My Heating Blood" to "In Hot Blood" as per the discussion over at Talk:Sakura Wars#Localized Title for Sakura Wars: Atsuki Chishio Ni. Given that, any thoughts from other project members on this? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:33, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree with that decision, to be honest. But then, Sakura Wars titles are a hot topic due to none of them being officially localized outside So Long, My Love. --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:47, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Atomic Heart talk

Hi everyone! Idiot that I am, in my nearly 18 years on Wikipedia I was legitimately blocked for the first time the other day, edit warring over Atomic Heart. I should've asked for input sooner and not continued reverting of course, but better late than never, right? The discussion concerns mentioning another game as a comparison. See Talk: Atomic Heart#Bioshock. Input is appreciated. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 19:47, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Arcade cabinet images

At Daytona USA, today’s featured article, a user tried to upload a photo they had taken of a bank of the game’s arcade cabinets. A cool addition, but I was reminded of something I was told at the article’s FAC in this diff: [4]. The reviewer, who is probably the most tenured reviewer of images in featured articles, expressed that arcade cabinets fall under utility objects and that an image of an arcade cabinet with its stickers or any imagery on it is inherently copyrighted by the maker of the game. What happened today reminded me of that, and brought up a couple of questions for members of this project:

  • Is any image of an arcade cabinet actually copyrighted unless it has no stickers, identifying marks, or video?
  • Do we need to consider removing all arcade cabinet images with any labeling or graphics from all arcade game articles and nominate “free” ones for deletion?
    • I’ll point out as well that many arcade flyers, which we usually allow one of for fair use identification, picture at least one model of their games’ arcade cabinet, but not all do.

I would like to hear the opinions of experienced project members on this, as it seems a serious question that will have repercussions for our arcade game articles. Red Phoenix talk 21:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

  • I think you're maybe misunderstanding the implications of what Nikkimaria said. They're saying that an arcade cabinet's shape itself can't be copyrighted, but that the graphics on it can be (and likely are). So, A photo of an arcade cabinet can't be free-use, because it's still a photo of copyrighted content. It's the exact same argument for why taking a photo of a physical game box isn't a free-use photo- the box design/shape may not be copyrighted, but the box art is still copyrighted whether it's a photo or a direct jpg.
  • I don't understand why that would lead to removing all arcade cabinet images, any more than it would lead to removing all box art images. It just means the photos are fair-use, not free-use. That typically means, if it's not the infobox image, that it should be adding something specific to the article (just like gameplay screenshots have to have a purpose). Usually, the actual shape of the cabinet or physicality is discussed, so it should be fine. --PresN 22:37, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
  • I disagree a bit with your assessment in that the comparison of box art images are a more exact parallel to arcade flyers, which all are absolutely tagged for copyright, than cabinet pictures, which at this moment are not. As far as I have ever seen, all of the arcade cabinet images I have seen used in articles are tagged as free use and not as copyrighted; I have yet to see a single occurrence of a non-free image of an arcade cabinet being used here. That may be because of a community misunderstanding of the copyright, and that’s the largest part of what I’m getting at. Even then, per the WP:NFCC, I’d have a hard time saying that both an arcade flyer and a picture of the cabinet are justified as minimal use in illustrating a game. I’m not saying a justification of the NFCC to include a cabinet picture couldn’t be done, but there are a lot of articles that have cabinet pictures tagged as free that truthfully aren’t. Red Phoenix talk 00:54, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
This is a discussion for Commons. But, I'll say this: consider that U.S. de minimis laws protect photos "where a technical violation is so trivial that the law will not impose legal consequences". In the case of arcade cabinet photos, the copyrighted artwork is typically a small portion of the photo, is skewed, maybe discolored, and/or blurred. The main intent of most arcade game photos is to capture the cabinet utility (the seat, the controls, cabinet size), which is acceptable. The cabinet artwork will be so warped that I don't think you can call it a derivative work. That's my interpretation. But as is with copyright laws, there's no fine line. You'll never know what's OK unless you take a photo to court. TarkusABtalk/contrib 02:46, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
Yes, de minimis is what allows us to have photographs of arcades in general, as these photos are of many machines with little direct focus on any specific cabinet so that while there may be some copyrighted art shown, its not the essence of the photo nor can the photo be used to extract high quality versions of the art. Masem (t) 02:55, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
There may be more recent examples that came to a different conclusion but at [[5]] a singular Donkey Kong arcade cabinet was kept as de minimis in 2011.--67.70.101.200 (talk) 23:43, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dead or Alive Xtreme Venus Vacation

Any opinions are welcomed here at this canvassed afd. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 11:00, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Splitting discussion for Kingdom Hearts χ

An article that this project has been involved with (Kingdom Hearts χ) has content that is proposed to be removed and moved to another article (Kingdom Hearts Dark Road). If you are interested, please visit the discussion. Thank you. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:34, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

New Articles (April 1 to April 7)

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 v3.20 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 15:57, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

April 1

April 2

April 3

April 4

April 5

April 6

April 7

Category:Windows-only freeware games and all the year-based categories under it seem awfully WP:OVERCATty and like a non-defining intersection. ~ A412 talk! 16:26, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
I have to admit, I didn't expect the Waluigi effect article to be what it was. Figured it was going to be a meme thing. Sergecross73 msg me 19:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yuuki (Sword Art Online Character)

Opinions requested on this controversial afd (last req). GreenishPickle! (🔔) 22:09, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

@Greenish Pickle! Probably wasn't necessary. Bludgeoning aside the consensus is pretty clear. Edit: Or well, I thought so. Looks like it's relisted. -- ferret (talk) 23:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

You know what? Let's do it. Let's bring Mario to GA

Hey everyone! I have had this article on my radar for quite some time and it's one that's been nagging at me, especially recently. So why not, in the year of our Lord 2024, why not bring Mario to GA? I'm talking full overhaul, because he needs it. I haven't done any big projects as of late, except for the ones I've been ignoring.

I'm leaving this message to see if others in the project are interested in teaming up and taking this one on as a team. Something along the lines of divvying up the work+collaboration, I mean. This is not one I would want to take on myself, especially since I don't have large bursts of time anymore. Such a project scares me to take on alone and I'm not the most experienced, anyhow. So, if anyone is interested let me know; this isn't something I want to hit the ground running on right away, so this is here to spark motion for those that are interested. Panini! • 🥪 21:13, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

I might help copyedit a bit. I would help more if I had any idea how to bring a character article to GA. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:28, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
As you know, it's already on my watchlist, and I'll be around to help review, guide, etc. Sergecross73 msg me 22:08, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
I might also be able to help with bringing this article (and Luigi) up to GA status. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:10, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
I really hope you can pull this off! It's an exciting prospect but a daunting project. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:39, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
I don't have much free time at the moment, at least for the near future, but I can try to help out where I can. Feel free to ping me if you need any help. DecafPotato (talk) 04:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
I could may work on the reception section which is mostly just listicles and trivia, and I also have articles I wanted to GA such as Rayman 2 and M NatwonTSG2 (talk) 12:27, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
I'm thinking about adding cosplays of Mario to the legacy section. I have found two celebrities cosplaying Mario. Seth Rogen [6] and Kendell Jenner [7]. Just need a third one. Kazama16 (talk) 5:38, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for all the kind words; I don't want to pull any major triggers without consensus, so as I work I will be detailing my progress and any pending changes on the Mario talk page. Feel free to leave comments or pitch in as well! Panini! • 🥪 00:49, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
I'll help with more minor issues (ref formatting), but I may do some major copyediting here and there. TWOrantulaTM (enter the web) 00:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Goals update

Well, it took a few weeks more than I expected, but as of today our goal of 75%+ of articles Start-class or better has been reached! (and our goal of 10% of articles B-Class or better is at 101.2% done). As such, based on the poll at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 174#Goals, I'm replacing them both with two new goals:

Congratulations, everyone! --PresN 18:49, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

That is some fantastic work. I think the lowering of the amount of stubs we have is more important work overall. I count 13 articles in that Vitals list that isnt already C+.Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Updated the link to a better list page- there's a bunch that aren't under "#Video games" that we have tagged, so we're actually at 35 to go (286/321). That includes Home video game console, though, our only List-Class Vital article- does that count as less than C or does it need to be FL-Class to count? --PresN 19:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
And since someone asked on Discord- the way I set up the goal for stubs is that it starts at the number of stubs we have today (8832) and tracks the progress from there to 7500. So, we start at 0%, unlike most of our goals which start at some percentage in the middle. --PresN 20:30, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Looking for Further Input on Merge Discussions

I recently opened merge discussions for Snorlax and Greninja at Talk:List_of_generation_I_Pokémon#Snorlax_Merge_Discussion and Talk:List_of_generation_VI_Pokémon#Greninja Merge Discussion respectively. The merge discussions have been up for a week with very little discussion, so I'd appreciate some additional input from other editors in regards to the proposed merges. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 17:06, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Rewriting the List of the Legend of Zelda Characters page

Hello, I'm trying to figure out if it would be a good idea to rewrite the list Legend of Zelda characters page. That page is very confusing to navigate, but I think I know how to make it better. If we could categorize all the characters into their race, perhaps it would be easier. For example, have Link under the Hylian tab, and Ganon under the Gerudo tab. All I want is to make this article better, and I hope you do too! Thank you for your time and consideration. 2601:48:C601:5550:E549:7E42:A0FC:52F4 (talk) 18:15, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

That would be significantly more confusing for anyone who is not already a Zelda fan, and most of our audience are probably not Zelda fans. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:18, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Additionally, we do not write articles from an in-universe perspective. We order lists like this either by character type (protagonists, villains, supporting characters, etc.) or by game they first appeared in. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Yes, agreed it needs cleanup, but we don't want to organize it by in-universe story traits. We'd want to do something easily understood by fans and non-fans alike. Alphabetical order, chronological order by introduction, by game release, etc. (Not advocating any particular way, just giving examples.) Sergecross73 msg me 19:39, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Would it be better to organize it like List of Mario franchise characters or List of Animal Crossing series characters? The first one demonstrates sorting by type, the second one demonstrates sorting by release. I think that sorting them alphabetically is a bad idea. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
For whatever reason, most of the Zelda game articles lack a Characters subsection under Plot. A lot of these characters should probably be exported to their respective game pages, leaving only the most major recurring characters on the list page. The BotW/TotK section is also far too long and includes many minor characters who probably don't even warrant inclusion post-export/cleanup. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:37, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
That's was exactly my problem. So perhaps we should reorganize the characters into their own games instead? 2601:48:C601:5550:E549:7E42:A0FC:52F4 (talk) 12:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Yes absolutely. If you're up for it, feel free to be WP:BOLD and start the process. Axem Titanium (talk) 17:43, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you so much! One other question, would it be better to fix the actual page or the page for each individual game? Either way, I will need help to add information, because I don't want to take all the credit! I want this to be a team effort. Thank you again! 2601:48:C601:5550:E549:7E42:A0FC:52F4 (talk) 18:55, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Yes, Wikipedia is a collaborative effort though sometimes that collaboration manifests in the form of large changes instigated by one editor, followed over time by numerous edits that fix or adjust things. If you feel comfortable doing so, I would encourage you to register an account so people have an easier time communicating and collaborating with you. As for the article at hand, I'm sure improvement will take the form of not only fixing/improving the actual page, but also exporting relevant information to other pages and improving them as well. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Link for convenience: List of The Legend of Zelda characters QuicoleJR (talk) 19:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 GA / Clean-Up

Xenoblade Chronicles 3 is well on its way to being a GA. It was previously nominated by User:Zekerocks11, who I thought was doing good work until they left Wikipedia. (And I hope they one day return.) Most of it is well sourced and well researched, and would benefit from a cleanup (in discussing the plot, music, and battle system). If a few editors take a crack at it, I'm sure it could reach GA with only a bit more work. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:23, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Is it really usual to have a somewhat uncited gameplay section? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:19, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
I agree, the amount of sourcing in the gameplay section is definitely quite distant from GA level. The writing could also be improved; e.g. just mentioning the DLC without further elaboration isn't very clear. ― novov (t c) 05:19, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Pocket Ants

Is it possible to make a wikipedia page about it? It's a mobile videogame where you can control an ant colony, but I don't know if there is enough information to make an article about it. And this website tends to be specific about what sources can be used and which can not, i do not know if an article about this is acceptable. Oixyplanet (talk) 06:13, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Oixyplanet, from a quick search through the list of reliable sources own custom search engine, there is very little to go on. One result is the Metacritic entry, but there is nothing really there either. Doesn't look notable enough. Hope this helps. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:27, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Shame. Can I still try making a draft though? Oixyplanet (talk) 22:29, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
@Oixyplanet: You can try, but there's no guarantee it becomes an article. QuicoleJR (talk) 01:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Alright! Thank you! I am aware of that and will try to back up everything I can, even if that means unpermitted sources, so I am not expecting it to become an article. I am thinking of using the wiki for it. Oixyplanet (talk) 08:29, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

User:A particle for world to form/Potential copyvio

Hello. I've wrote a script that compares Wikipedia videogame articles with Steam descriptions (Steam link is obtained via Wikidata). Initially I've developed it for Russian Wikipedia, but I've decided to run it on enwiki as well.

The script found more than 50 potential copyvios. I've cleaned some of them, but there're too many cases to handle alone. I've published the list there, hope it would be useful.

Careful, there might be some false positives. A particle for world to form (talk) 10:41, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for putting this together! Axem Titanium (talk) 18:02, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Fanbyte

Hey, I just thought I'd let people know that some Fanbyte pages are down, and it seems that, even though they're archived, they don't play well with archive.org. [8] [9] The site itself is not down, and other articles like this seem to work fine, but it may be that the site is having issues or going down. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 19:57, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Oh that's super weird. Do you happen to have the old, "non-legacy" url to see if it's on archive.org? Must be something weird about how IA is handling the request. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Yeah I checked with Kung Fu Man, it turns out it's just some weird handling with legacy stuff. I was able to find it archived properly. Still, would be good to fix the Fanbyte links, just in case it does go down. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 21:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

AU release info initiative

Hi, can we start paying more attention to pages that don't have any Australian release info? Many older games are missing this information. I will be adding dates I find from Nintendo Magazine System (Australia), retail websites such as The Gamesmen, and contemporary Newspapers.com sources, but it'd be great if everyone else could look out for this as well. Thanks! Venky64 (talk) 19:59, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

For older games, it is effectively the EU release date because they are both PAL territories. TarkusABtalk/contrib 21:20, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Not exactly. I've seen many cases where the dates between the two differ by anywhere between one day to ten. And Australia usually receives games on Thursdays, while regions like the United Kingdom get them on Fridays. In any case, it is worth looking into. Check out the recent edit I did on Turok: Dinosaur Hunter for just one example of this. Venky64 (talk) 22:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Australia is almost a full day ahead the US and half a day ahead of Europe. Could that be the reason for the discrepancy? Axem Titanium (talk) 21:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
It's not just that, and when that is the case, the official release listings for the two regions are different.
Here are more examples of games with distinctly different Australia release dates that I've edited in recently:
Driver 3, Icewind Dale, Diablo II, Mystery Case Files: The Malgrave Incident, Golden Sun: The Lost Age, Dungeon Keeper 2, Commandos 2, and Eternal Darkness. There really is a distinction, especially as you go further back! The homogeneity seen in release dates between both regions has closed with time, with PAL regions only being a common catch-all release listing with the advent of the digital release era around the early to mid 2010s. Venky64 (talk) 22:46, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
I am all in for including Australian release dates!
In fact since I am from Australia myself (despite not being born here), this is exactly what we all needed! NakhlaMan (talk) 13:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I think it’s a little situationally dependent, but in general I think it’s a good idea as long as sources can be found, and especially if the date differs quite significantly. Working in video games from the late 80s and early 90s as I often do, for instance, worldwide simultaneous releases weren’t really a thing for a while and the release date for Australia can vary wildly even from Europe (which in itself isn’t always one solid date any often varied from UK to other countries). Other regions are also situationally dependent - Master System and Genesis era Sega releases, for instance, I will sometimes include Brazil because it was a notable region for those systems. Red Phoenix talk 13:24, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Good article nominations

Whilst the WP:VG GAN backlog isn't that bad, there is quite the influx of nominations recently - for example, seven Pokémon articles are nominated, six from the same user! Just a light touch encouragement to consider trying out reviewing good article candidates if you haven't done so already. Happy to provide advice on the process. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 22:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

I thought you weren't allowed to have that many GANs open at the same time? Axem Titanium (talk) 04:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Probably not ideal, no. I'm guilty of it: I've nominated a second GAN as The Sims Online is a larger one that's sat dormant for some time, but agree that many is a bit much and probably not worth encouragement. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 05:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I try to nominate only as many articles as I review myself, so as to avoid something like this. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 05:26, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I would definitely recommend User:Pokelego999 willingly withdraw the majority of the nominations they made until the existing ones are out of the way. It is simply not realistic to be able to address all of them in a reasonable time if they were all reviewed at the same time. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:48, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Just as an aside, I've confirmed on the GAN talk page that there's no limit to nominations, so really this stuff is just a matter of courtesy and community views on how best to manage. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:22, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm not expecting editors to lay down what they're doing to cover these. Editors can cover them when they wish to cover them, I'm not exactly trying to rush anything, both for myself and other editors. In any case, one of my six has already passed, and another is in the middle of the review. I'm planning to hit up some of the backlog in any case, and I'll be trying to get on those as soon as possible. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 20:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
No worries, as above definitely not doing anything wrong, just wanted to encourage some momentum by raising the discussion. I'll pick one up too. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 20:22, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Agreed, in fact I think that editors should be encouraged to nominate as many as they can realistically support as the nominator- it doesn't serve Wikipedia to not participate in the process as fully as possible. That said, editors should also take care to review at similar volumes to what they nominate, in this and every other process, which Pokelego999 does, so no worries there. --PresN 21:23, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I will have much more time in a couple of weeks, so I could potentially take a few then. I tried it out for the backlog drive recently, and it was not as hard as I thought. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Antón Castillo

Dear WikiProject members,

I was just wondering whether any members of this WikiProject would consider contributing to a draft article about Antón Castillo, the central antagonist of Far Cry 6. The draft is still in its early stages, but it has potential to reach a quality standard, similar to the articles of the antagonists of Far Cry 3–5: Vaas Montenegro, Pagan Min and Joseph Seed. I have had very little experience in editing video game articles, so I was hoping that a few editors here may be able to lend a hand.

If you are interested, please indicate this with a short message below, or simply start contributing to the draft. :)

Kind regards and all the best, Lotsw73 (talk) 12:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Fallout: New Vegas

Fallout: New Vegas has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. – zmbro (talk) (cont) 18:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Fallout 3

Fallout 3 has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. 🥒Greenish Pickle!🥒 (🔔) 12:23, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Baldur's Gate 3

Would it be appropriate to split its reception section to its own article since that is so very large? I swear I’ve seen that on other articles but can’t think of an example. 2600:1008:B048:72B9:1060:2B2:2A8C:721D (talk) 16:27, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

No, that's something we've generally shied away from in recent years. Its excessive. Sergecross73 msg me 16:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Oh ok fair enough! Thanks 2600:1008:B048:72B9:1060:2B2:2A8C:721D (talk) 16:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
That section doesn't strike me as large at all. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 19:14, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Difference between PAL and EU/AU

Hi, I've noticed people addressing PAL and the simultaneous Europe and Australian release interchangeably in several articles, with Super Monkey Ball Adventure being just one of them. In the downloadable era, these releases make much more sense, but I highly doubt could have been localized to all of these regions during that time. Is there a distinction, and if not, should we be making efforts to correct them where we see fit by replacing PAL to say EU/AU? Venky64 (talk) 12:55, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

As I understand it, PAL = Europe + Austral(as)ia in our context since they are the only PAL regions of interest to enwiki. This grew over time, but I have to agree that it is not used consistently (especially since we never use NTSC) and potentially misleading because very few PAL countries actually saw that release. Some also confuse a PAL version release with a PAL region release. I would actually be in favour of deprecating "PAL" as a {{vgr}} parameter completely. IceWelder [✉] 13:11, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Its probably more relevant to console games pre-6th generation (roughly) where the difference between NTSC's 60hz and PAL's 50hz was relevant to how games played; as consoles became more like closed computer systems, that factor became less a factor. Masem (t) 14:36, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
I believe this is the PAL version vs PAL region confusion I was talking about. Our infoboxes are supposed to represent which regions a game was released in, not for what number of Hertz, and we never used "NTSC" to begin with. IceWelder [✉] 15:16, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Should we go ahead and hold a vote on deprecating it then, seeing as its meaning is inconsistent and ambiguous across all pages at best? Venky64 (talk) 02:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
So u want to replace PAL with EU/AUS??? It doesn’t make sense??? Like it’s not clear to me why u want this? Especially since Europe is NOT the only continent to use PAL. Stuff like Africa and the Middle East use PAL so the fact that you want to excluded the other countries neighbouring Europe is kind of misleading. NakhlaMan (talk) 02:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm saying replacing it would be practical, because "PAL" region releases don't line up with where the games come out, usually ever. People take it to mean just Europe and Australia when they list it in these infoboxes. But they refer to so many other countries at the same time, when in reality these games never came out there to begin with. And the average reader, who we design and write these pages for, won't understand that distinction, not to mention it isn't factual. At this point, it's operating more as our own mutually agreed upon internal language than anything useful and meaningful on a practical level. Venky64 (talk) 12:46, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Agreed, I've always been a bit confused about what exactly is meant by "PAL" in the context of release dates. In cases where Europe and Australian release dates are the same, we can use EU/AUS and thereby make it clearer exactly what is being stated. Martin IIIa (talk) 20:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Closure help/question

Okay, so the Trauma Center GTN has been very roundly stalled due to factors. Is there a way of voluntarily closing it? ProtoDrake (talk) 07:26, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

I think it'll pass when the FT/GT coordinators get around to it. GT is a content evaluation process with a long half-life, in my experience. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

New Articles (April 15 to April 21)

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 v3.20 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 20:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

April 15

April 16

April 17

April 18

April 19

April 20

April 21

New Articles (April 8 to April 14)

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 v3.20 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 13:08, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

April 8

April 9

April 10

April 11

April 12

April 13

April 14

Sorry for the delay, I was out of town. --PresN 13:10, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Did you have fun - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 13:11, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
It was a work trip, so not that much! --PresN 13:59, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Oh no - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:54, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Is YouTube within the project scope? Axem Titanium (talk) 18:34, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
They recently added (bad) video games. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:54, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Axem Titanium, YouTube has had a large impact on gaming (Let's Plays), so yes. — 🌙Eclipse (talk) (contribs) 23:11, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Is it related to "gaming" as a concept? Yes, of course, obviously. Is it "within the project scope"? Not as clear. What benefit does being scoped under WPVG provide to the article? Are we just staking jurisdiction for the sake of it? Axem Titanium (talk) 17:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
As I noted, I think that, even aside from YouTube being relevant for gaming YouTuber reasons, they do have games on the platform now that you can play. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 22:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Still doesn't really answer my question. Other than asserting jurisdiction because we can, what support does this WP provide that the other *checks notes* 13 wikiprojects and task forces don't? Axem Titanium (talk) 05:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
As a preface to any further discussion, do you feel similarly towards Twitch being under this project? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 06:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Are you trying to gotcha me? As a service built expressly for video games, I think Twitch has a much more obvious connection to the project scope than Youtube, which does many things and gaming is just one aspect of it. A brief glance at the edit history statistics shows many more WPVG regulars on the Twitch page than Youtube. I'm not morally opposed to including it in the project scope; I'm just confused why we'd even bother if we're realistically not going to ever make it the focus of a project article improvement drive, nor is anyone going to think to ask for help on it here. It feels like padding the project numbers for the sake of it. That said, there are tons of WPVG-tagged articles that have far more tenuous connections to the project than this so 🤷‍♂️ Axem Titanium (talk) 07:05, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
I feel with as many streamers are under the project and how concepts like Let's Play are commonly associated with Youtube, it works under the banner Axem.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 07:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
...No? What are you talking about, I asked for clarification. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 07:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

References in video game reviews template

Hello! I was wondering if there is a more simple way to add references to the video game reviews template, other than manually writing them out (I just did so at Stellar Blade)? I usually take the Cite option in the visual editor, but I either can not use that in this case or simply do not understand how to do it correctly. If there is no option, I will fix it in the source editing view. Vestigium Leonis (talk) 17:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Looks like you did it correctly? I don't use the visual editor so I'm not familiar with its quirks on the reviews template. I can't imagine editing template syntax is any fun using the visual editor tbh. Whereas lots of our lists of video games have a dedicated column for reference(s), we don't do that for the reviews template for whatever reason, even though every entry in the template is required to have a reference... Axem Titanium (talk) 18:13, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
The way I did it now it only includes the basic link, so no archive, author etc. which I normally can edit easier with the visual editor. I assume I can only add this in the source editing for templates then? Vestigium Leonis (talk) 18:32, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
I often start by posting the bare url into the ref tag and fill in the template later using a semi-automated tool like ReFill and finally refining the output manually. I also use Wikipedia:ProveIt to manage (and fix) existing references. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
ProveIt is exactly what I was looking for, thanks a lot! Vestigium Leonis (talk) 19:04, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

hi! how do I join this WikiProject?

hi!

I want to join this group but I'm not sure how? Can anyone please help me with this? Camila V. (talk) 19:34, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Camila, anyone can join a Wikiproject by simply editing and making improvements to articles within the topic area (e.g. video games). You don't need to publicly declare your allegiance to the project to make these improvements and of course you're welcome to come here for help if you need it. That said, I do see you say on your userpage that I work as a freelancer sometimes for Wikipedia pages, so if you see my edits in Wikipedia pages, there's a high chance that's because I'm working right now. If you do edit on Wikipedia on behalf of an organization or are paid to edit in any way, you do have to disclose that according to the instructions here. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:49, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
can i disclose it on my user page or on the page the employer told me to edit? Camila Vallejo (talk) 21:40, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Yes, in fact, according to our WP:COI guidelines, both are actually strongly encouraged. Sergecross73 msg me 21:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
allright! thank you very much for your help!! have a great day! Camila Vallejo (talk) 21:46, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
If my client has signed a confidentiality agreement, does that mean I can't disclose information on Wikipedia? Camila Vallejo (talk) 21:54, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
What is the confidentiality agreement about? Sergecross73 msg me 22:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
That's between you and your employer. If you do paid editing without disclosure and following the proper guidelines, you will get blocked. -- ferret (talk) 22:31, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Oh, are we not doing the Wiki-Communion and citing the Fezene Creed anymore? I'll say it, I think we've gone soft. Panini! • 🥪 02:07, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
wait wha? HEY WAIT U PLAY LUIGI'S MANSION?? Camila Vallejo (talk) 02:21, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Parodius! From Myth to Laughter#Requested move 17 April 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Parodius! From Myth to Laughter#Requested move 17 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 17:44, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Parodius: The Octopus Saves the Earth#Requested move 17 April 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Parodius: The Octopus Saves the Earth#Requested move 17 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 17:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

My Time at Portia in Wikipedia:WikiProject Yorkshire

I just noticed that My Time at Portia is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Yorkshire and idk why it was tagged as such, since there is no way it was made there or has relations to there. MTAP is made by Pathea, located in China, which wouldn't be considered at that wikiproject either.

Also, it should be in start class, mid importance of the wikiproject video games JuniperChill (talk) 17:32, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't know why it is under WikiProject Yorkshire, you might get some results if you ask that project. As for the importance rating, low is the default. This game is not important enough to go up to Mid. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:47, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Game's publisher, Team17, is based in Yorkshire. --Mika1h (talk) 17:53, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Ah that seems why. But My time at Sandrock, the sequal of MTAP, is only part of this wikiproject. But weirdly enough, Cities Skylines is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Finland for some reason (based on where the developer, Colossal Order is located), and not (also) part of Wikiproject Sweden, based on its publisher Paradox Interactive. I agree that they should all be just part of the video games project, and not include the location since people don't really need to know which country the game was made in. JuniperChill (talk) 18:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Actually, I am alright as they are. I initially planned to actually remove Yorkshire from MTAP before asking this, but now, I am leaving it as it is. JuniperChill (talk) 18:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, don't over think it. It's just kind of an optional side thing to tag articles with for organizational purposes. Its not super important or technical or anything. Sometimes it just depends on whoever decides to tag or untag articles on a whim. Sergecross73 msg me 20:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Outstanding FAC's need your help!

Back in January, Hotline Miami 2: Wrong Number, done by NegativeMP1, was archived from a lack of participation. So let's make sure that doesn't happen again! It isn't terribly long, and the article a fun read. The FAC is here.

Speaking of not being terribly long and being a fun read I would like to highlight PantheonRadiance's FAC on Etika, which has recently stalled as well. If this were to pass it would be (by my count) our third featured article about real people. The FAC is here. Panini! • 🥪 23:52, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Sourcing gameplay sections on series articles

I recently took up rewriting Call of Duty  5 for the Core Content, and the article basically needs a total rewrite. I've got a decent idea what to do for a development history section, but an overview of the gameplay of the series is where I'm stuck finding sourcing over. Not only am I not able to find in-depth coverage of the gameplay of the entire series (save for specific modes like Zombies), this is the type of series where reviewers eventually give up going over the games basic mechanics in reviews. After a while, they basically just go "you know the drill". Take this IGN review of Modern Warfare III for example, which just dedicates itself to going over the differences from the previous entry and having a launch map ranking. Does anyone with prior experience in writing series articles have advice in sourcing and writing these sections? (I'm also planning on rewriting Five Nights at Freddy's some time in the year, so make that two series gameplay sections I eventually need to do.) λ NegativeMP1 01:16, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

You could try the game's manual or ingame tutorial to source gameplay specifics. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:36, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
If you have to go to the manual for details on a vg series article on a specific aspect of gameplay otherwise not covered by any other source, its likely not significant for WP's purposes. (And even when covered, one should still remember our audience should be considered someoe that has never played a video game) Masem (t) 16:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I usually just dig through previews/reviews of sequels, which often compare/contrast entries in the series. For example, if a preview for Xenoblade 3 makes a comment like "The third title returns to the open worlds and item collection of previous titles", you could use statements like that to write/source sweeping statements about the series. I don't play/write/read about CoD though. I tend to write about JRPGs and Nintendo/Sega games, maybe they seem to outline changes moreso? Sergecross73 msg me 15:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Agree with the above that previews are a good place to go. Generally primary sources like manuals won't help with a series article because they're likely not telling you info about something besides the game in question. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 17:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Basic Math (video game)#Requested move 24 April 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Basic Math (video game)#Requested move 24 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 (talk) 05:33, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Arthur Morgan (Red Dead)#Requested move 15 April 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Arthur Morgan (Red Dead)#Requested move 15 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 🥒Greenish Pickle!🥒 (🔔) 11:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

New Wikiproject Proposal

Hi all, I have been working in the Video Game industry for a several years and often see the ever growing scale of projects and titles being released that are targeting specific groups in ever increasing numbers. Right now Train Simulators and Flight Simulators are in dire need to have articles expanded upon as well as multiple missing publishers, developers, and game titles. The ever growing subjects are getting big enough I would like to branch off these subjects from the WikiProject Video Games and start a new WikiProject for each specific subjects. WikiProject Train Simulators, and WikiProject Flight Simulators. Maybe even just branch off and make WikiProject Simulators. I'm unsure but I see the growth and potential of adding a new WikiProject to prevent the overall bloating of information just in the Video Game wikiproject.Another aspect of making a new WikiProject for each would be to also link them with the Video Game WikiProject as well as the WikiProject Aviation and WikiProject Trains.

I'm looking for feedback, support, and overall thoughts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Funforme3 (talk • contribs) 21:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

To be blunt, absolutely not. Fragmenting projects just leads to low participation side areas, where discussions on the topics go unseen by broader editorship, or miss important discussions from the broader project (I.e. WP:VG). Wikipedia is scattered with abandoned projects or ones that have 1-3 people who pay any attention to them. The fact that these genres seem to be poorly maintained is all the evidence needed that there is few editors interested in organizing as a project over them. Effort to work on this topics can easily be organized and pushed within the scope of the existing project. -- ferret (talk) 22:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
To be more sympathetic to the proposal, a task force can be helpful when there's a group of interested editors who could use a space to help organize the content and work. What that means, though, is that if you want a successful simulator task force, the first step is to find other editors who want to focus on it, and only after that create a task force page. So, you should redirect this proposal- is there anyone else here who wants to work on this with you? What work have you done in this area already, since people are often attracted to working in an active area? --PresN 00:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
To put it more simply, there are just not enough editors to actually split into anything. I am not surprised those areas would suffer from a lack of interest, as it's more of a niche genre. You can't really force editors to work on something they're not passionate about. The best solution is to do as much as you personally can rather than saying other people should; essentially WP:BEBOLD. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:33, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
I agree with pretty much everyone above. This Wikiproject is an incredible resource for asking questions, getting input, brainstorming etc. But despite being one of the most active Wikiprojects, it seems like we all have always had our own editing projects going on. No ones really looking for stuff to do, we've all got our own pet projects going on. So it can be difficult to drum up support for stuff like this. You're free to ask and try, but the ones that have been success stories (WP:SE, WP:VGCHAR) are few and far between. I recommend starting by just opening a discussion or two about an article or two you'd like to clean up, and see what sort of response you have, if improvements come from it, etc. That could give you a good signal on interest. I remember years back there was an editor that kept on wanting to drum up interest in editing old edutainment games. But they eventually gave up when they consistent garnered no interest in their discussions. Sergecross73 msg me 13:06, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
As someone who also love to edit transport related stuff (alongside video games), I don't really see a point in making a sister of the video games wikiproject. Like just look at Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Trams. Idk wy it even exists given the minimal activity and it is inactive (and UK only has a few tram systems), so that could be merged with the Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Railways. I also think that it is better for the train and flight simulator projects should be together, but I still prefer not having a separate project.
As a side note, I could say I unofficially participate in both this and UK railways project given that I have contributed to both, but are not a member. JuniperChill (talk) 12:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Stardew as a good article

I am literally surprised how despite the fact Stardew is a really popular farm sim game, it hasn't attain GA status. To me, it feels like a perfect candidate since Undertale, Animal Crossing: New Horizons and Jurassic World Evolution all reached that status. It is a class B, mid importance article however. I could nominate it for GA (followed by DYK - did you know) but I have only edited it once. I am only asking but it seems like a perfect candidate. I could also argue that Minecraft and Fortnite should be GA, but I think both fail because it is not stable. I don't really see why Stardew is unstable, by looking at the history aside from the fraction dispute that occured two months ago. JuniperChill (talk) 12:00, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [edited link so that it now points to its history]

A lot of times being a popular game works against an article becoming GA because there's so much more information that has to be integrated. It doesn't guarantee an article becomes a GA because article quality (versus sheer length) has no correlation with popularity. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:12, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Looking at the views for Stardew and ACNH (for anyone wondering about the spike, its because of my DYK nomination for cozy game), I do see why its popular articles that often do not have GA status. It really could have been given the status within a few months of release. However, GTA 5 is more popular than both and is not a GA, but an FA (featured article) so could be an exception. Generally, I would only say that its generally somewhat popular games attain GA/FA standards JuniperChill (talk) 12:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
It could definitely become a GA, but does need a bit of work. If you are up for the task, feel free to be the change you'd want. Popularity isn't really correlated to how good an article is. There are GAs on obscure titles, and bad articles for really popular titles. It's more about who is willing to work on a subject. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:27, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

New Articles (April 22 to April 28)

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 v3.20 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 14:33, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

April 22

April 23

April 24

April 25

April 26

April 27

April 28

Gau and Strago are up for GAN now, and I should have Setzer ready here in a day or two. That just leaves Locke left as the big one to spin out.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:39, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Short descriptions for console generation articles

Last night I revised the short descriptions for articles on video game console generations (excluding the sixth generation, though its description then provided the basis for those edits). My reasons were for consistency and conciseness along with providing a more neutral tone (perhaps best exemplified with my edit for the fourth generation; would it really be appropriate to highlight one console above the rest, especially with such a long name?). Sergecross73 reverted my edit for the eighth generation and we talked a bit over this.

Sergecross73 said his motive was over the use of the phrase "gaming devices", also stating the articles focus more on a period in the video game industry than just the consoles, which I have to agree with. He didn't mind too much about the year, however. Since this is a series of edits he suggested I start a discussion here, potentially for a better option. I hope at the very least the short descriptions for these can be more unified while remaining both informative and accessible. Carlinal (talk) 18:44, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I don't have super strong feelings on it, just thought it should maybe be discussed since they changed it across all of the generation articles. For example, 8th gen was changed from "Video game console generation starting in 2012" to "Gaming devices since 2011". I just wasn't sure that was an improvement. That was the only one I reverted. Some, like the 4th gen one linked above, started off awful, so certainly not defending that one. Maybe there's a third option that's better too. Sergecross73 msg me 20:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Thought this one over and decided that discontinuation dates should also be considered within a general era. I don't know if others like magazines or industrial changes should be counted but I'm mostly against that. So I came up with "Video game generation from XXXX to XXXX", since I'm certain we can pin down exact years for each of them rather than having to just mention decades. Carlinal (talk) 22:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
It doesn't appear that anyone has any strong thoughts on this, so unless there's any response to this comment, it looks like you're in the clear to handle it as you please... Sergecross73 msg me 17:28, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Aight, cool. I'll do this over again based on my last comment. I'm thinking about keeping "gaming" over "video game" for length and I don't think the former would deter from the subjects or article titles the descriptions refer to. Carlinal (talk) 00:49, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

The Nerd Stash

I haven't seen anyone talking about The Nerd Stash in WP:VG/S. Is this site reliable? Supergrey1 (talk) 04:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Their public-facing "About us," "Fact checking policy," and "Guidelines and practices" information is very respectable. Their "Join our team" page suggests that they have no requirement of experience, but that doesn't have to be a bad thing. Presumably these are properly paid positions. Sadly, it seems they do not have a staff list and the names of primary positions are unknown to me. Looking at random articles, the writers do not have qualifications listed. I wouldn't use this myself, but I think it has potential. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:13, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Simply looking at the massive amount of clickbait and listicles I would err on the side of "content farm". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:58, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
I agree. It's ridiculous how many "hot women in skimpy clothes" articles they have. I guess whatever gets clicks.... Woodroar (talk) 12:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Yeesh, the level of click-bait and churnalism I was barraged by before I could even check their "about us" info was shocking. I'm also against it less use. Sergecross73 msg me 14:03, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Is it a Valnet site? It has the exact same layout and CMS as Screen Rant/CBR/etc. Axem Titanium (talk) 17:48, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Is this the new name of our Wikiproject? Panini! • 🥪 18:02, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Seems to be an independent site, they just copied the Valnet aesthetic. --Mika1h (talk) 18:04, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
@Axem Titanium It's ever so slightly different. I suspect they've deliberately done this to confuse readers. Which isn't a plus in their favor. -- ferret (talk) 18:07, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
So in conclusion, a new entry in the Unreliable category. 😂 Supergrey1 (talk) 01:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

PC Invasion

Moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources

Another untouched source for WP:VG/S. Is PC Invasion reliable? Supergrey1 (talk) 02:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

This discussion is probably better held at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources. --PresN 03:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
You are right. I moved it. Supergrey1 (talk) 04:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Final Weapon

Moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources

Final Weapon is also not yet mentioned in WP:VG/S. Is it reliable? Supergrey1 (talk) 02:53, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

This discussion is probably better held at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources. --PresN 03:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
You are right. I moved it. Supergrey1 (talk) 04:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Short or long titles?

I need to know if long titles are preferred to short ones. For example, I made and titled it Coffee Talk Episode 2: Hibiscus & Butterfly which can be shortened to Coffee Talk Episode 2 (can't believe that was the only video game listed on April 22). However, Bandle Tale: A League of Legends Story is titled simply Bandle Tale. I think removing the bit after the colon is still unambiguous. Many sources for both mention the full name. I also made a teahouse talk earlier this month. An RM for both may be done.

WP:PRECISION and WP:CONCISE may be relevant. JuniperChill (talk) 12:23, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME is what it's all about really: how do reliable sources call it mostly? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:33, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
I think that common name is a general policy while WP:NCVG covers naming conventions specifically to video games. it says to 'make the disambiguation precise enough to identify the topic (but no more precise than necessary), and as concise as possible'. I also note that Coffee Talk 2 is under a DYK so any name changes to that need to be done after DYK is removed from the main page as redirect links are not allowed for DYK purposes.
But anyway, it looks as though both games mention commonly use the full name in titles so I will likely open an RM for Talk:Bandle Tale shortly but won't for Coffee Talk 2. JuniperChill (talk) 12:53, 30 April 2024 (UTC) Per comment below, plan to RM withdrawn JuniperChill (talk) 13:36, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Bandle Tale is that way because of the RM at Talk:Ruined King, even though I personally disagree with it and believe the subtitle is intrinsic to the title. However, there was a clear consensus to keep it at the shortened titles. Personally I go by whatever the common name it is that the gaming press call the game, and whether they shorten the title or not. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:16, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Help with third party sources

I recently created X: Unmei no Sentaku thanks to how much commentary there is in the official website. Still, I can't find anything that might help its reception. Any ideas? Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 01:27, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

For something released in the 2000s, you could probably just use IGN, GameSpot, etc., from WP:VG/RS. It's not that old. If you can't find anything, though, you could look at the Internet Archive and Google Books. They have a lot of scanned magazines. Articles shouldn't consist entirely of primary sources, by the way. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:29, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
The big problem is that this game was never released in Western regions so I can't find English articles. I tried googling its Japanese title but found no article other than cheats like alternative outfits for the fighters. Tintor2 (talk) 19:18, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Sweet Baby Inc./video game controversy template

Assuming there's less attention to the talk page there, is there an appropriateness in adding Sweet Baby Inc.-related info (described as Gamergate 2) to the video game controversy template? Somewhere in the harassment and workplace conduct column or even in the social aspects column. Carlinal (talk) 06:47, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Oh no. "Gamergate 2" is the last thing I wanted to read. Looks like it would be an alright inclusion under the harassment or "other" categories in the template. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
The problem is that to qualify as a "controversy" there has to be a legitimate grievance behind it. As one example, Mass Effect 3's endings were legitimately disappointing to many players, which EA even acknowledged by retconning the original endings in some respects. From what I can tell, the uproar surrounding Sweet Baby Inc. is entirely manufactured by a center for online harassment, and certain things were actually done by the studio themselves without their input. As the article says, "In 2023, the studio became the target of online users who claimed it promoted a "woke agenda"." WP:FALSEBALANCE by calling something a controversy is not something Wikipedia should advocate unless there is evidence the controversy is based in fact. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
I think that's a good argument. Our gamergate article is about the harrassment campaign itself, which is controversial. This company isn't controversial, but the harassment campaign directed onto it likely is. Categorizing our article about this company as a "controversial item" would indeed be misplaced. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:41, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Given that we have topics in that template that aren't about controversies but have portions of their articles about controversies directed at the topic, like Activision Blizzard, microtransactions, and loot boxes, I see no reason why not to include SBI (directed to that section). Masem (t) 12:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
As I said, in the case of microtransactions and loot boxes, trustworthy sources have raised legitimate concerns about their addictiveness and their potential to scam the customer. They have even been removed from certain games. The SBI "controversy" can be classified as pure misinformation in the absence of a source detailing any truth behind the accusations. If there was even one iota of credence to it, I would not oppose marking it as a controversy. And even in the event they did force developers to add diversity, the addition of diversity to a game is not controversial for most of the population. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't believe the original Gamergate campaign was sorta credible either, aside from accusations of excessive PC and related content that became hypocritical after further self-exposing toxicity in gaming cultures. But it had an article of its own because it got really big, it was something most people never dealt with, and just spread and spread until the tide turned against the propagators.
As for the "SBI Detected" shenanigans, it likely will never reach that same height, hopefully. It just isn't as big, which I speculate being that more people are seasoned to situations and related subjects to this, especially when this got called "Gamergate 2". And yet, the info in that section is about as big, or slightly bigger than the company history preceding it. I'm almost glad it's not to the point where "Gamergate 2" has to be spun off independently. For that to happen something even worse will have to occur, regardless of who's doing it.
I don't mind if the section doesn't get a spot on the template, but I find SBID and Gamergate pretty similar in motives and action, even if the situations against Sweet Baby don't fully fit the definition of controversial. Carlinal (talk) 15:40, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
I have worked to minimize the inclusion of items that aren't in-and-of-themselves controversies, as much as possible. It is a difficult line to walk and a weird template to try to maintain. I think being selective in what we add to it is probably the best option? ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 14:09, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
I've been convinced by ZXC. Gamergate caused measurable changes in the industry in terms of strategies mitigating harassment. SBID is lol, lmao even. Smoke but no fire. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:43, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Don't Even Think - Requesting help with notability

Hello, members of the Video Games WikiProject,

I am seeking assistance with the draft for the video game Don't Even Think. I've encountered challenges, particularly with language barriers, as I believe there are reviews, articles, documents, and editorial content from China and Japan that could help establish the game's notability, but I am not proficient in translating or navigating foreign language sources.

If anyone could help with this article it really would be appreciated.

Xalsier (talk) 04:13, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Martin O'Donnell

Hello. There's a discussion regarding the infobox changes on the Martin O'Donnell article over at Talk:Martin O'Donnell#Infobox discussion that may be of interest to project members. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:35, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Wrote first article on a flash game, would love feedback

Only recently started editing and drafted my first article on an old Flash game, Papa's Pizzeria. There's many games by Flipline Studios so I'd like to get the ball rolling and write articles for the whole series. Since this is my first article, would love any feedback though I know there's many articles in need of assistance. Just wanted to put it out there! Squiddyonwiki (talk) 21:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

First, you should link the page so we don't have to search for it Draft:Papa's Pizzeria (video game). Second, you must build the article primarily from third-party reliable source articles. You are not using any. The article, as it stands, will surely be rejected. See WP:VG/S for more information. TarkusABtalk/contrib 21:33, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
I am not an AFC reviewer (and I am a relatively new user whos been editing since dec 2023), but I think the article will likely not be successful at the submission. If that were in mainspace, it would almost certainly fail, should it end up in AFD. There are currently no sources from WP:VG/S and it is almost never talked about in reliable sources. I also say that the disambiguation video game is not necessary since there are no other articles with that name so should be titled just Draft:Papa's Pizzeria. Even Draft:Flipline Studios (who made the papas games series) isn't an article yet. I would say the chances of that article being accepted is 'low' to say the least JuniperChill (talk) 21:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Thank you -- working on adding more reliable sources. I thought linking to the two developer's blog posts for information (ex: additions to gameplay, publishing dates, etc) but completely understand adding more reliable sources. Going to go through the list as linked, and appreciate the help! Completely new here and wanting to add what I can. Squiddyonwiki (talk) 21:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
I did a quick check for reliable, secondary sources unaffiliated with the developer, and found none besides the short mention in HG101 that has been included in the article. My opinion is that you should stop working on it - to put it bluntly, it's one of the thousands of non-notable Flash games out there on the Internet that will likely never merit an article. Hopefully it will not turn you off from being an editor, but there are some times where it's better to say the full truth so that people won't just waste their time. Notability has no bearing on how good a game is, just how much attention it got, and sometimes that can be frustrating. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:33, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Hey Zx, I'm just going to outright say that was unnecessarily rude and you know it. Even by your own admission you've done a "quick check". Given you also oversee AfC submissions it's not a healthy mindset to have.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
I think this is a bit overblown, as the user did not have any problem with my comment. I also clearly stated I was being blunt and did not mean it as an insult. If that's still not enough, I don't know what is. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:36, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for checking it over ZX. Taking your feedback and Kung Fu Man's suggestion I have merged all the games into a 'series' page and have added more reliable sources such as Apple, HG101, IGN, and other secondaries which I hope add to the legitimacy. It can be found under Draft:Papa Louie (game series). Squiddyonwiki (talk) 15:07, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Here are some sources: [10] [11] (you'll need to use a Paywall Bypasser to check this) You'd probably need more, but it's not too far off, honestly. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 22:35, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks! I appreciate it. And I appreciate all feedback on this, even blunt or honest. I’m extremely new to this and don’t want to come off as someone just in it to add this one series. I’ll keep digging and see what I can find. Really enjoy everyone’s resources that they’re sending. Squiddyonwiki (talk) 23:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
You can bypass the Wired paywall but looking it up on archive.org, the old article there should be intact. Here's a few more: Dexerto (warning: Dexerto is often frowned upon, but it can be used to enhance statements from other articles, and this book. Hope this helps.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:41, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
I still think that at least three full reliable sources from VG/S is required as all those sources are either primary or just mentions. Plus making a successful article (i.e., one that will likely survive an AFD) is not that easy. See WP:YFA. JuniperChill (talk) 00:10, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
You know an odd thing when looking at these sources, there is some indication of *discussion*, but the games seem to be variations of each other. Perhaps the better route Squiddyonwiki is to develop an article on the game series instead of one individual work by them? Pool the reception together and find common threads, i.e. stuff like this PC Gamer article could give you a good spine to build around.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:43, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
That’s a great idea. They are often the same game play styles just different food you serve. Will reformat. Thank you! Squiddyonwiki (talk) 01:25, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Question regarding Fallout: New Vegas and Metacritic

So I'm working on the Fallout: New Vegas article right now and I included information about how the game missed the 85/100 bonus payment by one point (it's in the first paragraph of the reception section). It definitely deserves to be mentioned, but what I was curious about is whether journalist reactions to the usage of Metacritic as a determining factor for bonuses should be mentioned. I found a couple of articles talking about this very subject, specifically as a reaction to the Fallout: New Vegas news 1, 2, as well as an Ars Tenchina article titled "Why linking developer bonuses to Metacritic scores should come to an end" (I have no idea why, but every time I link to the Ars Technica article it defaults to the websites front page). Do you think these warrant an inclusion in the Fallout: New Vegas article, or are they outside of the scope of the article? Famous Hobo (talk) 03:15, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

It could be phrased as "It was used by journalists as an example in their opposition of the use of Metacritic for developer bonuses". Then it would clearly relate one to the other. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:25, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
@Famous Hobo: Like Zxcvbnm said, it can (and IMO should) be included if you phrase it in a way that makes it clear that they are related. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:38, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Agree a few sentences on this should be included, but I do wonder where, if we can support it, larger criticism about the publishers' use of metacritic for bonuses in general can go somewhere. It's not appropriate for the Metacritic article, but may be for video game publisher. — Masem (t) 14:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Video game journalism would be my vote. It could mention how reviews are relied upon to prove how "good" a game is, and in turn how much the developers get from publishers. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:33, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Characters importance

How are Scorpion and Sub-Zero from Mortal Kombat labeled as "mid-importance" but Ryu from Street Fighter as "high-importance"? It makes no sense since they are all equally well-known around the world. At least Scorpion should be at high-importance because of how popular he is. Kazama16 (talk) 06:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Are they? I was under the impression Ryu was a lot more well-known. I'd imagine Mortal Kombat's later release and more mature rating are probably a factor in that. Ringtail Raider (talk) 10:33, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Ryu was mid-importance for most of the article's lifetime, until User:Mika1h changed him to high-importance in 2020. I'd personally disagree with this assessment and think he is still Mid-importance, being one of a large cast of Street Fighter characters. I'd consider high-importance widely known by non-gamers, which is pretty rare besides a select few pop-culture juggernauts like Mario, Pikachu and Sonic. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Go ahead and change it back mid, I don't remember what I was thinking at the time. Mika1h (talk) 15:48, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The best reply I can give you is that if Scorpion was low-importance it wouldn't change anything for the article. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks Cukie, so I can change Lara Croft's GA icon to C class and no one will revert me because "it wouldn't change anything for the article." (Lol just kidding) Kazama16 (talk) 18:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
[12] - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 19:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

New tool for importing SteamGridDB images

Hi, just wanted to share a new tool I've made: sgdb2commons. It's a browser script that makes it easy to quickly import images from steamgriddb.com to Wikimedia Commons. The website is a pretty good source for high-quality video game logos, and many of those logos are too simple to be copyrighted, so this tool lets you pick images to copy to Commons. Installation and usage info can be found at commons:User:IagoQnsi/sgdb2commons. This is a very simple first version of the script, so please let me know if you encounter any issues or have any suggestions! Best, IagoQnsi (talk) 02:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I think this should probably have a bit stronger language that the vast majority of content on steamgriddb is copyrighted and should not be uploaded. TOO Logos are probably less than 1% of the content on that site. -- ferret (talk) 02:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
It's in bold near the top of the documentation page; per your suggestion, I expanded it and added another bolded note in the 'Usage' section. URL2Commons also has a warning during its upload process (sgdb2commons sends you to URL2Commons to finish the upload).
There's enough usable stuff on SGDB that it seemed worthwhile to have a tool. There are over 11,000 black/white style logos, a significant portion of which are very simple. There are also many simple images amongst the official logos and the icons section. –IagoQnsi (talk) 03:10, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Merge feedback needed

There is a discussion that has been ongoing for months and not gotten any feedback at Talk:World of Warcraft#Merge Proposal. Full disclosure, I opposed it, but anything supporting or opposing is welcomed so as to close it in a reasonable timeframe. It could be due to the main page having no merge notice. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Dead game tense

Simple question. Is there a guideline I can refer to regarding whether a dead game, whether mobile or other, should be referred to in the past or presence tense. Nier Reincarnation has just shut down, and another user is changing one word to "was" from "is", and I don't remember if anything solid was decided on this so I don't want this to turn into an edit war. ProtoDrake (talk) 14:15, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

MOS:TENSE says it's "is" not "was". --Mika1h (talk) 14:24, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't think MOS:TENSE properly accounts for live-service games that are no longer playable because they were shut down. They're more akin to lost films, which are properly written of in past tense. I think this might need a broader discussion. oknazevad (talk) 14:30, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
We do consider live service games that are completely unplayable after service shutdown to be past tense. Games that used a live service that was shuttered but the game still remains playable in limited form should be present tense. — Masem (t) 14:33, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
I see the guideline that was linked below covers that. Good to know. oknazevad (talk) 14:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, I didn't know Nier is/was an online-only game. MOS:TENSE also says "use past tense [...] for subjects that are dead or no longer meaningfully exist". --Mika1h (talk) 14:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:VG/TENSE states: Use the present tense when describing a subject that continues to exist. ... [A] canceled video game and a discontinued online game exist only in the past tense. – Pbrks (t·c)
"Was" is only used if the game's completely and utterly unplayable by any normal means, because it depends on an online server to operate, even a delisted game can still technically be playable to some people so it still uses present tense. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
+1. A game only counts if it is online-only and they shut off the online servers. Kirby's Blowout Blast should use present tense. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Cf. Final Fantasy XIV (2010 video game). Axem Titanium (talk) 22:45, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
  • Bringing this up again as a good question was raised at Talk:Overwatch (video game). There, OW1 is obviously not playable, however, old copies of the software still exist and there are fan efforts to have an emulated server, even though that's not really discussed in RSes. Now, as I was writing my replies there, it got me to thinking of why we call "ancient" games like Death Race (1976 video game) in present tense given there likely are only a couple surviving machines but in reality we likely presume the playability of these through emulation (MAME and whatnot). So perhaps we reneed to think our thinking on service-based games that are shut down, specifically would be something like "Overwatch is a team-based FPS game that was discontinued in 2022 and replaced by the F2P Overwatch 2 or something like that. This doesn't deny that the game is still out there in some form but stresses that the game no longer is playable by official means. Even if games were pulled from sale, as long as it was out there for some time for sales to have happened, it would be present tense. That would leave past tense only for games that never got made. --Masem (t) 13:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
    • I suggest the following be considered. What prober verb should be used?
      Always use present tense for verbs that describe genres, types and classes, even if the subject of the description (e.g. program, library, device) no longer exists, is discontinued or is unsupported/unmaintained.

The following example is incorrect:

  • TrueCrypt was a disk encryption program, released by TrueCrypt Foundation.

This sentence suggests that TrueCrypt is not a disk encryption program, although it once was. (Assume TrueCrypt has never changed its nature during its development lifecycle.) Grammatical deletion hides the fact that there are two "to be" verbs in this sentence; the more elusive fact, however, is that these two "to be" verbs are grammatically different: The first is a stative verb that does not change throughout its duration while the second is a dynamic verb which may cease to be valid after a duration when discontinuation occurs.

Use either of the following, whichever is more appropriate:

  • TrueCrypt is a discontinued disk encryption program. It was released by TrueCrypt Foundation.
  • TrueCrypt is a disk encryption program, released by TrueCrypt Foundation.
  • I personally think that including private servers in determining tense is not the right way forward, because it is not the way the creator intended and they could be shut down at anytime. For example, Overwatch relies on Battle.net. Private servers would need to find a way to get around this, since reverse-engineering Bnet is forbidden by Blizzard's TOS. Blizzard shut down bnetd over this, and could very well do this to all potential OW1 private servers. Therefore, I think that the tense for live-service games should be determined by the status of the official servers, not the private ones. Quetstar (talk) 14:38, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
    Its not the issue with private servers, it is that, in this case, Overwatch is a game that is now discontinued; detailed media about the game and gameplay is still available. Consider nearly any old arcade game, we still know the ROMs or code are around, etc. as well as its existance. The contrast is to a game never released to the public, like Prey 2, which we know has been cancelled without any release. — Masem (t) 16:55, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
    I see, but shouldn't the tense be based on availability? Just because there is media or gameplay doesn't mean we can play the game. Arcade games can still be played thanks to to the wonderful magic of emulation and surviving copies, but live-service games that have been shut down are not in any official capacity. Quetstar (talk) 20:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
    The fact that it isn't available to play on original servers does not mean that the game does not have an existence or that it is no longer called by its original name. The manual of Style is designed to have our articles make sense. If the game was called Overwatch, then what is it called now? Using "Was" infers that its no longer called Overwatch, but in reality the game hasn't changed, only the servers have been shut down. But its still Overwatch.--Jojhutton (talk) 00:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    I think that an RfC should resolve the matter. I will also say that no matter the tense, Overwatch is still called Overwatch. Quetstar (talk) 01:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    I think you're reading too much into the grammatical idea of the verb in the opening sentence being the name of the game and not the game as a work.
    Think of it in terms of lost films. WP:FILMNOW explicitly mentions lost films as a valid use of past tense. A film is considered lost because there is no way to view it. A game can be considered lost if there's no way to functionally play it. Now, emulation makes that line really fuzzy, so for some there may be logic in using the present tense for older games that are otherwise unplayable, but discontinued live-service games, which required the use of online infrastructure not directly controlled by the player, are akin to any other defunct service business. Sure, there may be relics of the business, including copies of the client software, but it no longer functions, so past tense is fully appropriate, and may actually be the only factually accurate tense. oknazevad (talk) 03:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    The Lost Film comparison is a false analogy. WP:FILMNOW makes exceptions for lost films, but the first line of the Lost Film article says, 'A lost film is a feature or short film in which the original negative or copies are not known to exist in any studio archive, private collection, or public archive. It means that no known copy exists. This is not true for Overwatch. Copies of the game exist. The code still exists, even if it's not currently being offered up for play om its original servers. In Film, if a copy exists in a private collection, the film still known to exist, even if the person who owns the film doesn't offer it up to be watched. Same with Overwatch. The game exists, even though the person who owns it doesn't offer it up to be played. We know the code exists. We know that the game is played on private servers. So what do we call that game that is played on private servers if its not called Overwatch?--Jojhutton (talk) 10:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    @Jojhutton: If a film company who had only ever released their film on DVD did something to force all DVDs to be unable to play the film, and only able to access the DVD's main menu, would we not consider it to be a lost film? It is the same thing here with these online-only games. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:59, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    Might weigh in when I get the chance to read up, but let me know on my talk page what the verdict is just in case I need to change Mario 35 accordingly. Panini! • 🥪 03:39, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    I think for video games, the notion of lost films falls very much on whether the field considers emulation valid or not. Take the first iteration of arcade games. These likely fall into the notion of lost films in that there's likely no original hardware for many of the not-so-successful games that came out - but smart people grabbed their ROMs which float around the internet in a questionable copyright state (emulation itself is not a copyright problem). Whereas lost films' media is assumed completely gone, "lost" games likely exist in this state, and that would also go for games like Overwatch 1 or Mario 35 or a number of closed mobile games. Do we acknowledge these games exist in the present even if the means to play them require steps that may not be fully legit, or do we acknowledge that these games are for all purposes no longer playable on easily available hardware and thus are "lost"? Or even the third option here in that we know the game was made, was playable, was reviewed, etc, and thus still is a known work to the public but simply not playable anymore, in constrast to works that never got released and have been cancelled? It's not an easy question framed in this approach. Masem (t) 04:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    I think that brings the question of if a 'service game' is defined by it being a service and should be compared to, say, a TV channel no longer around, or is defined by it being a game and the service factor is secondary.
    I mean, I would assume someone can still have a copy of Overwatch, and even open the application file even if it doesn't do anything without the service backend. The game itself still exists but the issue is the means to engage with the game doesn't.
    Look at it this way, and this is really hypothetical I suppose, but say there was a console that had a few games. Those games still exist, you can possess physical copies. But all the consoles have been destroyed, thus you can't play them at all. I imagine in such a case WP would still use present tense for the game, right? But on the other hand...if a game is completely unplayable it's just a bunch of useless code so perhaps past tense IS better, because the experience of the game is impossible. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 04:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    I agree with this. If the game is no longer playable, the code is of no use. Quetstar (talk) 05:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    The problem is that it is possible to revive formerly dead online games Frankenstein style by using custom servers. For example, I myself played a bit of Battlefield 2 some years ago despite the game being officially shut down. BF2 has a very limited singleplayer mode with bots so it would still be present tense, but playing on custom servers is still a possibility for literally any online game that is dead and would otherwise require contact with an official server to work. That's why I am a bit dubious on the use of past tense for any game at any time. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    We're talking about online-only games, not all of them. Quetstar (talk) 10:47, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    And I am noting that, like said previously, online-only games can be revived and played by subsets of players, making the notion of unilaterally declaring them to no longer exist to be unclear. It is typically done solely for things that have been completely lost, i.e. not known to exist in anyone's possession. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:01, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    I know, but private servers can be shut down at any time by the creator of the game. Quetstar (talk) 11:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    Private servers should not count IMO. They are typically not permitted by the creator of the game, and there is no guarantee that they stay up for any amount of time. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    But if the game is played on private servers, then what is the game called? If its not Overwatch, then what is it?--Jojhutton (talk) 13:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    The verb at the start does not refer to what the name is, but what the article is about. By your logic, articles on dead people should use present tense because George Washington is still called George Washington even though he is dead. These video games are the gaming equivalent of dead people. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:22, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    Whether something is "allowed" typically has no bearing on Wikipedia since we are not PR, for example Wikipedia has plenty of articles on mods that may not have been allowed by the original developers. The fact remains we can't 100% confirm something to be unplayable, as the code still exists somewhere.
    We can confirm that George Washington is dead and he will never come back. A dead organic person is quite different than code stored on a system that can be rebooted at any time. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:31, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
    I agree with Masem at the top of this section and ZXC. As always, we go by reliable secondary sources, not the official company line. If sources report a mod/unofficial server exists, then for wikipedia purposes, the game still exists and should follow present tense. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
This would generally work for emulators that cover a console or similar like MAME (such that we say that all arcade games that saw commercial distribution are still emulatable and thus we'd use "is") but like in the case of Overwatch, there is no reliable sourcing to the emulation though it's clear it exists. — Masem (t) 15:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
We're bound by sourcing in far more egregious instances than this. Overwatch 1 private servers don't exist until sources say they do. Axem Titanium (talk) 16:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
You're allowed to use a primary source as long as you are only using it to verify something about itself. For example, you can use the page of the developers of a mod to verify that it exists without that having to be confirmed by a gaming journalist site. Any claims that are subjective do require a secondary source. If you are simply stating a fact that a game is still playable using X or Y method, it should be allowed. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:31, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
No, for the same reason articles like Skyrim modding require secondary sourcing to confirm that a mod for the game exists. If you allow primary sources for fan content, then all sorts of non-notable mods and fangames will be added to the relevant articles and lists. We do not want to go down that path. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
I am not stating an opinion, but a Wikipedia policy - see WP:ABOUTSELF. Inclusion criteria for lists often mandate that it be mentioned somewhere on a journalist site, but we're talking about something actually relevant to the article at hand. Though if I'm wrong about this, let me know. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Particularly when talking fan works, primary sourcing is not sufficient since it would allow a solo project with no reputation to allow their project to be included. Once we have third party coverage, using primary sources to expand is fine.
To the point at hand, "everyone" knows MAME exists (covered readily in RSes) and so the presumption that almost all old arcade games are playable is fair, thus our current presumption is that these exist in a playable format, earning the present tense. The small Dan project to allow OW1 to be played has virtually no coverage, so despite its existence, WP cannot say it exists, so OW1 could be taken as a dead game for tense purposes. But that's the rub here, and I don't know a clean answer to this (barring the line of canceled games) — Masem (t) 17:58, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
If there are no secondary sources for a fan project, including it in any article would certainly be UNDUE. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
I think my point/question was somewhat buried by the long trail since they seemed to roll with my later part.....I think this all comes down to this: Which matters more, the fact it's a service or the fact it's a game. If the service is important, because it doesn't exist without it, then it should be treated similar to a TV network not around, or whatever. Whereas if the fact it's a game is important because being a service is secondary to its game existence, then treat them like other video games. I actually don't have a huge opinion on which it 'should' be but I do think it'dt's something to think about when making the decision. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 05:28, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Move discussion on Talk:Pokémon Red, Blue, and Yellow

There's an ongoing discussion regarding a requested move for Pokémon Red, Blue, and Yellow. The discussion can be found at Talk:Pokémon Red, Blue, and Yellow#Requested move 7 May 2024. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:25, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Note that I decided to close the discussion because of WP:SNOW and the nom has withdrawn. Not sure if its acceptable to strike in this case, given the quick close, but feel free to remove the strike if Im wrong. JuniperChill (talk) 10:51, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

New Articles (April 29 to May 3)

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 v3.20 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 15:20, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

April 29

April 30

May 1

May 2

May 3

1.0 Bot is down, so we're cut off at the 3rd for now. --PresN 15:20, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Congratulations to Vrxces for getting Link's Awakening DX to GA so fast that it shows up on the New Articles list. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:00, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Mhm, always fun to see that happen.--AlexandraIDV 16:42, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Helps that it was reviewed within 2 days of its nomination. Many GANs languish for months without comment. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:00, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Of course, just as much credit to the reviewer @QuicoleJR for reviewing so promptly! ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 21:26, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Haven't seen one of these lists in a long while. MKsLifeInANutshell (talk) 07:31, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Also why does Football Genius: The Ultimate Quiz, the article I created 4 months ago, get a mention now? I also haven't got a mention of my other articles such as Masquerade: The Baubles of Doom or Marvel Rivals yet. Thoughts? MKsLifeInANutshell (talk) 07:38, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
I dont know about Marvel but Masquerade doesnt have a VG banner on the talk page. Mika1h (talk) 09:24, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, that's exactly what it is. If and when the WP:VG banner is placed on the talk page is what triggers showing up on these lists. Sergecross73 msg me 10:47, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Yes, which is also why there's a little note on it saying that it was moved to article space 4 months ago, because as you say it was actually created before the past week and just not tagged with the WPVG banner until now. --PresN 12:02, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Placing developers/publishers/key notable people in series categories?

Would it make sense where a category for a game series to exist, say, as Category:Hades (series), to include the developer, publisher, and key personnel (with standalone articles) to be included in that category? — Masem (t) 03:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Mario Kart: Double Dash

Mario Kart: Double Dash has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

On OpenCritic

Not looking to agitate the slightly dated agreement that OpenCritic is an accepted source that reliably performs the function of a review aggregator. Conceptually though, a question I am wrestling with is: are what aggregators aggregating useful or reliable measures of mainstream critical reception when we wouldn't use most of the sources they are aggregating? Are we comfortable citing an aggregator when what it captures may mostly be from those websites?

OpenCritic has an interesting double-edged dilemma: it's very open. Its coverage anecdotally seems to outpace Metacritic in finding site reviews. This would be great and indicative of a more representative aggregator with wider coverage, but the problem is that in doing so it imports reviews from a vast amount of unreliable, unassessed or obscure WP:VG/S review websites.

Take a recent game with good coverage, Balatro. Metacritic has 33 reviews comprised of 19 reliable, 2 situational, 7 unknown and 5 unreliable sources. You could say that Metacritic is far from perfect either, but despite the inclusion of a few duds, the aggregator's score is largely capturing the scores of most of the mainstream reliable sources out there on the game.

In contrast, OpenCritic has an impressive 47, consisting of 14 reliable, 3 situational, 18 unknown and 9 unreliable sources. In this case, there's more unknown or dubious sources affecting the score. For the few gems it finds that weren't captured in Metacritic, there's also just a bunch of random "by gamers for gamers" site in the mix. Not particularly a big problem though.

This issue really rears its head once you get to indie titles, where in those cases the majority of games constituting an OpenCritic score will be from unknown or unreliable sources. In that case, using the score is a bit misleading: what is being displayed is not a mainstream consensus but only that of whatever reviews the aggregator could scrape together.

Sorry for the essay, but as posed above: is having a second aggregator that captures the views of any and all reviews largely what we expect it to do for us? Is a more judicious approach needed in some cases? ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 07:52, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

This is only in response to your first sentence, not your point generally, but I'm not sure the OpenCritic debate should be characterised as "slightly dated" considering the RfC that led to its inclusion in the MoS was less than a year ago. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 08:08, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Cheers, was looking at the RS page so missed this disucssion. The discussion did not really touch on the issue I raise above from a skim, looking more like it followed the lay lines of problems around duplication and the merits of the two different scores used on OpenCritic. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 08:39, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Realistically, we don't really care where an RS gets it's information from, only that we deem the publication/website/author/etc. to be reliable. If the BBC started using a non-RS to get it's information from, it might mean we'd go towards pushing for the BBC to be unreliable (if the info was consistently wrong), but that wouldn't mean we'd have to have all those locations to be an RS for the BBC to also be an RS.
The big difference in this case is that Opencriitc by it's nature shows exactly where it gets its info from. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
I think you'll find the vast majority of reviews aggregated by Rottentomatoes or Metacritic for movies to be from "unreliable" or "unknown reliability" sources as well. I would say the point of aggregators is to be somewhat transformative of the underlying data in that they reveal something that you wouldn't be able to see just by looking at a bunch of raw numbers. There's no principled way for an aggregator to include only "respectable" (reliable) reviews and there's no feasible way for an aggregator to include all reviews. As long as you're aware of these limitations on "authoritativeness", there's no problem that some unreliable sources get aggregated. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

New Articles (May 7 to May 12)

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 v3.20 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 14:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

May 7

May 8

May 9

May 10

May 11

May 12

Bot came back online after a few days, so May 5-7 are scrunched up together into the 7th. And Alexandra IDV wins this weeks award for "article GAd in the same week it was created" for Shin Megami Tensei J. --PresN 14:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Any thoughts on References and parodies of Indiana Jones? The title itself is clunky, cultural impact would probably be more suitable, but this list has three references, one of which is pointing to the Indiana Jones wiki, which is user submitted. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
"Indiana Jones in popular culture" assuming that the article can be sourced per TRIVIA. Masem (t) 20:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Soft launch vs official release info

Is there anyone who knows the Manual/Style on how to treat soft launches in video game infoboxes? Should they be listed as part of the official release info or be sectioned off to just the prose? For example, Plants vs. Zombies 2 soft-launched first in Australia on July 9, 2013, before having an "official" release of sorts worldwide on August 15, 2013. There was a similar case with Crash Bandicoot: On the Run!'s year-long exclusivity to Malaysia, as this is a common occurrence with mobile titles.

What is the consensus on this? Should soft-launch releases be listed in the infobox when they're defined as "rehearsals for a full release" by many? Venky64 (talk) 12:30, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

  • For things like early access, we do list that date - until the official release - in the infobox with the addition text of being early access (See like Hades II). When the game hits full release, that early access date is removed in favor of the official release. As long as you can document that (more than just a storefront page), this approach would be fine for soft launches. --Masem (t) 12:52, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
It's worth documenting the soft launch in the Development/Release section but not the infobox. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Archive_174&oldid=1235872825"