Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 69.157.254.64 (talk) at 21:36, 8 June 2020 (→Project Gotham Racing V.2.0 (video game)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Category:XXXX sequel video games

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

Yeah, I think that's not a defining cross-categorization. We don't have these yet, but I could argue that cross-categories like "YYYY first-person shooters" or "YYYY Windows games" might be justifyable as there are history changes within genre and/or platform, but sequels -- no. They should be categorized as sequels, and of course by year, but that's it. --Masem (t) 17:22, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete them all. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:36, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redundant and useless. All of them should be wiped. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 19:36, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Send them to CFD please. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is this going at a rapid clip. @Cwf97: Could you please stop and join this discussion at the CfD above? -- ferret (talk) 15:03, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@IceWelder: You may want to add the "film" version to CfD as well, see [here] -- ferret (talk) 15:05, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferret and others: Due to the sheer size the film categories cover, I created a separate CfD discussion. IceWelder [✉] 21:14, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Considering this editor's prolific output and poor track record, I would consider proposing a TBAN on category creation so they can focus on less controversial and damaging contributions to the project. Axem Titanium (talk) 17:16, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, what the hell is Category:Video game franchises by year of disestablishment? If someone can add that (or start a new CfD), that'd be great. I'm on my very broken phone and my tablet's run out of battery. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:19, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Soetermans:: Went ahead and brought it to CfD. Discussion is here. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 20:30, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User was advised to actually communicate with others nearly 2 years ago and has since proceeded to continue making hundreds of elaborate, superfluous category trees, but only about a dozen edits on talk pages. Is there a local consensus to bring up a WP:TBAN at WP:AN? This is honestly disruptive. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:57, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Within the past two years, this editor has created 986 categories, 128 of which have been deleted, with dozens more at CFD right now. They were dormant for the past few months, but seem to be on a 2000+ edit spree in the last month or so. Axem Titanium (talk) 00:02, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This user needs either a temporary block or a topic ban regarding categories like these. He's being disruptive at this point and has refused to engage in conversation even when others have asked him to. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 00:29, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I also warned the editor in January, which they ignored. I think at the very least a WP:TBAN is needed per WP:COMPETENCE, although such disruptive behavior doesn't give me any confidence that their edits anywhere else will be any less problematic.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 20:05, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I mentioned this at the comics project last year, so I'll bring it up here: I think Cwf97 might be a sock of CensoredScribe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who was banned in 2014. They've been caught socking like 35 times in the last five or six years, and Cwf97's behavior is reminiscent of theirs. JOEBRO64 20:11, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is not something this project talk page can deal with, someone will need to either head to SPI if the evidence is strong for that, or to ANI. Seems pretty obvious the local project group believe action is needed, but ANI needs to make the call. I myself left a final warning of sorts. -- ferret (talk) 22:25, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't here looking for someone to deal with this, I was just mentioning it. JOEBRO64 22:56, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, meant as a general statement to this entire couple of replies, not directed to you specific. -- ferret (talk) 00:27, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
He was quiet for a few days which would have made it difficult to bring up at ANI as an immediate pressing issue but he started back up again recently. I'll try to put together a listing soon. Axem Titanium (talk) 07:02, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Axem Titanium: I'm willing to just block him, there's more than enough warnings here and he's already got another category at CFD. However if you'd prefer ANI, let me know. -- ferret (talk) 13:01, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I must have missed this ping. I started a thread at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#TBAN_for_User:Cwf97_from_creating_categories. @Ferret: CC: IceWelder Masem Dissident93 Namcokid47 TheJoebro64 Soetermans Zxcvbnm Axem Titanium (talk) 05:27, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Axem Titanium, sorry for the late reply, I've haven't been editing last couple of days. I see action has been taken already! Good work. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:13, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FIFA Online 3 AfD Notice

Just put this out there, but FIFA Online 3 was put up for AfD over a week ago. If any wants to comment or help fix up the article, be much appreciated, cheers. Govvy (talk) 17:02, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox format

Today I created the article Mega Man X (character). While it still needs some tide up and sources, I can't fix well the infobox when it comes to voice actors. Sorry for bothering. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 23:38, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have managed to fix the issue ([1]). Regards  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 23:48, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find any GameRankings review on NBA ShootOut 98

I have a problem. I can't find any GameRankings reviews on NBA ShootOut 98 because Google has wiped all the GameRankings links off from the face of the earth. I even tried searching for the game, even typing in "nba shootout 98" on this link here, but it takes forever and never brings me any results! It seems the Wayback Machine search thing is broken! When will the issues be fixed so that I can find the GameRankings link for NBA ShootOut 98 again? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 23:45, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You must search manually by browsing the webpages on Gamerankings. You cannot use the search mechanism. It does not look in pages, only in the kinds of pages (HTML, PNG, etc.). --Izno (talk)
Particularly for this game, here is the Gamerankings in 2004. --Izno (talk) 23:59, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Here's your archive.org page [2].
A trick I have just figured out. Gamefaqs for some reason is at least keeping the id aspects of the games. So if you need to find the GR page on archive.org:
  1. Go to GameFaqs
  2. Search for your game (so like, if I want NBA Shootout 2000, I get to "https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/ps/198089-nba-shootout-2000".
  3. All you care about in that is the stuff after "...gamespot.com/" part, here "/ps/198089-nba-shootout-2000"
  4. The old GameRankings page would have been at "https://www.gamerankings.com" + the last part of the GameFaqs URL, so in this case, the old GR page is "https://www.gamerankings.com/ps/198089-nba-shootout-2000"
  5. Take that to Archive.org and you should be able to grab an archive snapshot.
I have no spot-checked on too many but this seems to work consistently. --Masem (t) 00:03, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. And I've found the archived link I was looking for. I'll remember your advice next time. --Angeldeb82 (talk) 02:17, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New Articles (May 25 to May 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 v3.4 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 13:55, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 25

May 26

May 27

May 28

May 29

May 30

May 31

Need further input on Talk:Virtual Boy hardware merge

Can anyone provide their input there so that we can have a consensus on whether it should be merged to Virtual Boy or not? - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 16:21, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary templates

I’ve come across a few recently, so I figured I’d discuss them collectively. I don’t think any are necessary.

  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Fey_family_tree - In-universe cruft to the highest degree.
  2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Xenoblade_Chronicles_chronology - Ignoring that I think we tried to move away from these sorts of in-universe templates, this one is exceptionally poorly conceived, as there aren’t enough titles or continuity between them for there to be a “chronology” at all. It ceases to flow, it’s just a bunch of names plopped into white space.
  3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Donkey_Kong_chronology - Listing out the ...Donkey Kong... fictional continuity?

I just wanted to get some consensus going here, as these aren’t those “relics forgotten from the sloppy days of 2009” like some of the stuff we discuss here. They’ve all been created in the last few days... Sergecross73 msg me 01:50, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@TheJoebro64: It's stuff that makes you emotional before you even start the game! ~ Arkhandar (message me) 16:08, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've already made the point before that the Fey family tree is completely unnecessary. At least two other editors have pointed out that the tree contains inaccuracies and connections that are either not supported by verifiable sources, or ones the author decided to artificially bloat the tree with, such as non-familiar relationships. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 02:46, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
These are not needed. I noticed creator Arkhandar also made the {{The Legend of Zelda chronology}} template. That's too in-universe for my taste as well. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 05:39, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I feel differently about the Zelda chronology, which was the topic of a lot of sigcov from official and independent sources over the years. The idea of including the timeline is not as frivolous as it is for the Donkey Kong Kronology. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 09:16, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not against seeing the template at the main article on The Legend of Zelda, but it's also included at plot sections at individual games, at The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Majora's_Mask#Synopsis for instance, it just pushes the plot to the side and shows very in-universe template of the fictional chronology. I don't think that's helpful for the general reader. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 10:42, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I could be wrong, but I think Zelda was one of the few rare instances where it was acceptable, since the chronology gets so much RS coverage. But at best it’s an exception, it absolutely should not be used to justify things like “Donkey Kong chronology” or “Xenoblade chronology”, which has very little to document at all. Sergecross73 msg me 12:13, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Zelda template was created in the last week. It was originally just a table in the series article and it was split out and added to the plot sections of several games. -- ferret (talk) 12:45, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the template as a single-use in the series is fine (its like a simple figure to path out the timeslines), its not needed in the other games as rarely, within a single Zelda game, does the specific continuity of any other Zelda game directly affect it save for exact sequels (spirit train from wind waker, but that can be described in text). --Masem (t) 12:53, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, didn’t mean to sound like I was defending its placement on everything Zelda. Only it’s existence. And even then, I’m not personally all that enthusiastic, I merely can understand a policy-based rational for its existence. Sergecross73 msg me 13:31, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The specific issue I have with the chronology template is a) it's huge, interfering with content to a great degree on smaller screen sizes, and b) doesn't actually provide any useful context. On normal articles the whole dichotomy of the chronology is not going to be explained, so it's basically only adding confusing information for general readers. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 15:48, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@David Fuchs: I nice concession I think we could make to address this issue is to remove the template from the individual game articles, and put a See also in its place linking to the series article section where you would find the chronology template (could be converted back to a sidebar, but it would bloat the articles markup). ~ Arkhandar (message me) 16:12, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is the Xenoblade one necessary though? There’s only 3 titles. And one is a spin-off that falls outside of the “chronology”. That leads you with...two items. A chronology of 2 items is something that needs visual representation? Sergecross73 msg me 17:59, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Sergecross73 and Kawnhr: For the precise reason that there are 4 titles, on multiple continuities is enough reason to warrant a visual representation in order to properly and easily illustrate how the titles relate to each other. And as far as I know, X is not regarded as a spin-off by RSs. That being said, I don't oppose to removing the template from the game articles and just hard-code it in the series article. ~ Arkhandar (message me) 19:10, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Arkhandar: That all three games are in different continuities is a reason against creating a series chronology, because it means there manifestly isn't a chronology (or at least not one that's readily apparent), and there's no use in a table that says "these games are unconnected". — Kawnhr (talk) 19:44, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Kawnhr: Actually, no. While X is on a completely different continuity and has no chronological ties with any other games in the series (it's properly marked as such, and described as spiritual successor, as per RSs), the other games share the same overarching story, in that the events of one affect the other, akin to The Legend of Zelda (with an arguably much stronger connection). This is cited by RSs, feel free to take a look at them to know more. So again, it's a visual help to how these games all relate (and don't in the case of X). ~ Arkhandar (message me) 20:22, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Arkhandar: Again, "readily apparent". All the table tells any reader is that one game (and its expandalone prequel) takes place in one continuity, another game in its own, and a third game off in its own world. To anyone not familiar with the series, it communicates no chronology at all; that it only has meaning and use to a series veteran is a mark against it. And as mentioned upthread, this is ultimately concerns four games— it is hard to see why four games, which have loose connections, needs a visual aid. These sort of tables should only be used for long-running and convoluted series, whose chronology cannot be succinctly explained in prose— like Zelda, or Kingdom Hearts. But this is not one such case. — Kawnhr (talk) 20:44, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Kawnhr: While I don't oppose the template's deletion, I don't see why the "hard-coded" version should be deleted from the series article. The article's point it's to explain the series as a whole, and this visual guide has a place in it when it comes to story and plot. It's not like the chronology is immediately apparent either (e.g. 2 doesn't follow 1 in the traditional sense, and X is not the tenth entry following that) While I understand that Wikipedia is not a catalogue, it's not a book either. So deleting visual helpers just for the sake of deleting makes no sense. ~ Arkhandar (message me) 20:57, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because it’s useless. It’s much like how we don’t do timelines for band membership in music articles (like this) when it’s just 4 people playing the same instruments for 20 years without any membership changes - no one needs a visualization to understand that. Much like this, which is removed on the spot every time people try to add it. People don’t need a visualization of such a basic concept. Sergecross73 msg me 21:05, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Sergecross73: I understand. But while Xenoblade's timeline is simpler than say the one from The Legend of Zelda, it's not straightforwardly linear like the examples you gave. Again, it's two linked continuities and one unliked one, with non-traditional numbering in the mix. Keeping series timelines out of game articles is already a nice concession; but for series articles it just makes no sense. If the simplicity is what's bothering (which is subjective), then why not have it collapsed and let the reader choose whether it's useless or not? ~ Arkhandar (message me) 23:29, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Axem Titanium: What about Template:Metroid chronology? ~ Arkhandar (message me) 00:18, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What about it? I don't particularly care for chronology templates in general, but this one has a dozen links and the fictional chronology for this series is not obvious compared to its release order. Axem Titanium (talk) 00:32, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Axem Titanium: So, it's getting differential treatment from say Template:The Legend of Zelda chronology solely based on size? ~ Arkhandar (message me) 01:02, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The objection to the Zelda template is that the individual games rarely reference more than one or two of the others and operate largely independently of each other, so including the full chronology isn't necessary; for instance, seeing that Tri Force Heroes takes place in the "Hero Is Defeated" timeline doesn't offer any particular context to someone reading about Majora's Mask, and so on. In contrast, Metroid games actually reference and build upon the previous games' stories quite frequently, and knowing where any game occurs in relation to the others does (or at least can) provide context. I mean, Metroid isn't exactly the most story-driven series out there, but a template seems reasonable to me… — Kawnhr (talk) 02:39, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to nominate the Metroid template too. I’m not certain that would survive either. I really think the only reason Zelda gets a pass is because of the extreme attention it gets from sources, with things like Hyrule Historia. I rarely see Metroid get much RS attention for its fictional continuity... Sergecross73 msg me 02:55, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused. Don't most of these series already have a series template? What's the point? I'm leaning delete, but why even create these in the first place? Shooterwalker (talk) 05:16, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On the matter of useless templates...

Any feelings one way or another on "special edition tables" like the one on Assassin's Creed Syndicate ? I have a feeling that we can state "The game shipped alongside special editions which included exclusive content, artbooks, figurines, etc...." and only going into details when the special edition gets flagged for its oddities (Fallout 76's canvas bag issue for example). --Masem (t) 21:59, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I thought we had a consensus against that sort of stuff too. (Are we going soft? Burning out? Outnumbered by the non-encyclopedic masses? I kid, Im not actually blaming anyone, I know I haven’t been around to help as much lately either.) Sergecross73 msg me 22:24, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fairly sure we agreed as a project not to track this retail nonsense anymore. This one was missed in the cleanup, or else readded at some point after that. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:44, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
WP:GAMECRUFT Item 17 states not to have special edition tables as discussed last year. Regards  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 23:56, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sega is on the main page

Sega made it to the front page! Congratulations to everybody that has made this possible. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 04:54, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Helping out with connecting new articles to Wikidata?

Hello folks!

I am active over at Wikidata’s WikiProject Video games. Among many activities, one of the basic maintenance things we do over there is to make sure Wikipedia articles about games are connected to a Wikidata item.

In practice, I have a Petscan query (see here) for articles that have {{Infobox video game}} but are not connected to any Wikidata items. If there’s already an item for that game, then the en.wp article gets added as sitelink ; if not, we create a new item with instance of (P31)=video game (Q7889). The process is quite smooth with PetScan and Duplicity[1].

I have tried really hard to stay on top of that (for the Wikipedias in English, French and sometimes German) ; but this project is so active that I keep falling behind: right now there are 142 such unconnected articles (And with some personal changes I will soon have very little time for wiki-work). Sometimes someone will eventually run a bot to mass-create items for all these articles, which often results in a bunch of empty items (172 right now), often duplicates[2].

So I was wondering if you folks would consider helping out? It’s simple: when one of you folks create a new article (or put in shape a newly created article):

And that’s it! Something like this new item from the Italian Wikipedia is great (Of course, feel free to add more statements/identifiers ;-). It’s enough for Wikidatians to take it from there (the item will show up in maintenance reports such as d:Wikidata:WikiProject Video games/New video game items)

I understand you have plenty enough on your plate without having to care about the Wikidata side of things, and I certainly would not expect it from you. But if some of you folks can sometimes think about this small step, that would be tremendously helpful. :)

Thanks for reading! Jean-Fred (talk) 13:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ PetScan will indicate with the tickboxes which items are likely/unlikely to have a matching item ; and Duplicity is good at surfacing potential matches and creating items with one click
  2. ^ For example, Championship Rally (Q85751430) was bot-created for Championship Rally (2000 video game), but we already had Championship Rally (Q5070141)
  3. ^ there are over 15K video game items without an equivalent article here − for good reasons of course (not all of these would be notable here or are covered as part of another article) ; but it does means that it is likely that an item will already exist for new articles: to take a random example, The Golf Club 2 was created a few days ago, but The Golf Club 2 (Q31285018) has been around for 3 years
See also WP:VG/WD if you want a little info on editing Wikidata. -- ferret (talk) 14:08, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can't seem to load your PetScan query to check the overlap but as you can see from our new article alerts Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games#New_Articles_(May_25_to_May_31), a lot of them are made by editors who aren't active at WPVG. Axem Titanium (talk) 16:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CFD on "Video game franchises disestablished by YEAR"

I've nominated the categories following that general title formula from 1999-2018 here at CFD, following the recent deletion of the parent cat. bibliomaniac15 18:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion: Industry response to George Floyd/protests/riots on "2020 in video games" page

Way back before COVID was as big as it was, I suggested keeping the impact on COVID on the 2020 in video games page. Obviously that grew much larger than expected, and the separate page was necessitated.

Now on the other hand, this situation related to the protests and riots to the death of George Floyd has caused enough responses from the industry to be documented, but not for its own page, so I'd suggest a short section on the 2020 page to highlight at least the major efforts (eg companies committing $, specific actions like GTA /RDR Online shutdowns etc.) --Masem (t) 17:02, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t mind, though I haven’t seen much beyond “Company supports the cause” or “Company donates X amount of money” outside of your GTA example. Not a criticism, just a note that it’ll probably be about repetitive. Sergecross73 msg me 20:53, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Humble Bundle donated $1 million. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 20:59, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sony postponed the PS5 games reveal
  • CD Project postponed the Cyperpunk livestream
  • Eurogamer, Rock Paper Shotgun, Dicebreaker, EGX, MCM Comic Con, VG247, GamesIndustry.biz, USgamer, Outside Xbox, Outside Xtra, Digital Foundry, Nintendo Life, Metabomb, Video Games Chronicle, Push Square, Pure Xbox all took part in blackouttuesday. - X201 (talk) 21:09, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The list above verges on the trivial for me. There's nothing special about this industry in their response. --Izno (talk) 21:53, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, all of this could just belong on a gaming-specific subsection within another article. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:42, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Dissident93 Thats what Masem is already suggesting though. No one is suggesting a stand-alone article. Unless you’re opposing “2020 in gaming” as the target, which, okay, but where are you suggesting then? Sergecross73 msg me 01:24, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, this is what I'm saying, some new section, likely just after the COVID section, on "Industry reaction to the George Floyd protests". And to be clear, this is going to be super high-level. I am presuming most of the major companied voiced support in the same manner other entertainment venues did , it is those that put a significant $ into supporting other efforts that should be called out. Similarly , I don't feel it necessary to pinpoint each announcement or the like delayed form this week into next, but that in general, several major events that had been planned for this week (as the substitute E3 week) were moved. We should document the industry did something, but not be so ... egotistic to identify every single action? That was my original fear with the COVID page but it quickly outgrew that. Here, its still a caution. --Masem (t) 02:28, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I support that. It's notable in the sense of having third party coverage. But also articles are WP:NOTNEWS, so probably just a couple sentences in the 2020 article. Shooterwalker (talk) 02:55, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Until it gets much bigger and much more significant than a twitter post and <1% of their annual revenue, I think a few lines in 2020 in games the DUE level of coverage we should give this. Don't need to pat the Brands on the back for doing the bare minimum. Axem Titanium (talk) 04:12, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I was only disagreeing with the suggestion of having a standalone article, as there is always somebody who supports that. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 09:33, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is about as much as expect to write, only to add any other major donation-type aspects ($100k being the cutoff), or similar actions like Infinity Ward's. I've left 3 articles that are summarizing the industrys response broadly that we don't need to go into the details about otherwise. --Masem (t) 21:22, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:48, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Games by Quantic Dream

If anyone wants to support my Good Topic nomination. Cognissonance (talk) 18:53, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 June 2020

Where is the Sega Master System Version, there is no Mention of it. It could be added on platforms also 79.156.110.38 (talk) 19:50, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. The template you're referring to lists nominees for GA, FA and various other statuses - not just a list of articles that come under the remit of WikiProject Video games. Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 19:58, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Different question: does anyone know why anon IPs occasionally ask these random edit requests here? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:06, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Soetermans, I think it's because they go to the talk page of a WPVG article to submit an edit request, accidentally end up at the project page by clicking the link at the top, and just submit the request without checking that they're on the wrong page. JOEBRO64 20:45, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, more specifically, check the box to the right- they submitted this request for Template:WPVG announcements, and the talk page for that template redirects here. --PresN 03:15, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Super Smash Bros. guest characters

Requesting more opinions on a Super Smash Bros. guest characters category up for discussion. I'd have added this to the deletion noticeboard, but last I checked it did not (natively) support non-articles. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:46, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve got similar concerns about Category:Video game secret characters - which I’ve seen be added to a number of Smash character articles. Not sure it’s fitting. Is Shulk really a secret character in Smash? Sergecross73 msg me 23:29, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think that secret characters have some mystique to them, compared to unlockable, but that's super subjective. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 23:30, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think the big issue with this category is that secret characters are much less a thing, and are closer to trivia than ever, not being something people would search for. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 23:43, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. It’s fails WP:DEFINING - it’s highly populated by Smash characters, but none of these characters are defined by being “secretly” unlocked in Smash Bros. Shulk or Pichu are defined by being parts of major video game franchises, not by the fact that they’re not immediately selectable in the opening moments of first loading up Ultimate. Sergecross73 msg me 02:44, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also it's so subjective as to be meaningless. Anyone can be a secret character if you try hard enough. Diddy Kong is a secret character in DK64 because he's not unlocked at the beginning. Axem Titanium (talk) 04:39, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of cult video games

I'm a bit baffled by the longstanding existence of this article, but since I've never brought an article of its sort to AfD before, I thought I'd get input here first. There are no comparable articles for other media (e.g. List of cult television show, List of cult comic books), which makes sense to me because the term "cult following" is basically WP:PUFFERY; its definition is hopelessly vague, and its existence almost impossible to disprove, so journalists can freely claim that just about anything has a cult following without fear of being contradicted. Thus, the fact that many of the list entries are sourced doesn't take away from the fact that the article is basically a mountain of non-neutral claims, any more than it would in a well-sourced article called "List of fondly remembered video games". Am I missing something?--Martin IIIa (talk) 18:13, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New Articles (June 1 to June 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 v3.4 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 19:46, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 1

June 2

June 3

June 4

June 5

June 6

June 7

Project Gotham Racing V.2.0 (video game)

Someone please look at this one. Seems like a case of a blatant hoax using Project Gotham Racing (video game)'s text and references (which I removed, of course). Jovanmilic97 (talk) 19:59, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious hoax, the sledged developer went out of business in 2011.--69.157.254.64 (talk) 21:36, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games&oldid=961506127"