Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games

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

id Software and MOS:TMRULES

[edit]

Our guidelines expressly tell us to capitalize proper nouns, like names. This is something I brought up in relation to id Software (and, by extension, the id Tech engine family) in the past. Just now, @DrakeFruit insists that S&box must be allowed to be called "s&box", because "engines such as id Tech are spelled with a lowercase first letter, it is not against any Wikipedia guidelines". Because of this "other stuff exists" argument, I'd like to raise the question again: Is Id's exemption from this guideline justified, and how does it apply to S&box? IceWelder [✉] 21:40, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Using all-lowercase letters may likewise be acceptable if it is done universally by sources, such as with the webcomic xkcd. id software is universally cased that way. One should look to the sources for S&box, I don't have a good feel on that. — Masem (t) 22:35, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Casually browsing many sources: the common standard seems to lowercase it. A fair amount do, but its much more frequently lowercased; many mentions of the game in source titles capitalize it, but looking at the source itself its often lowercased there instead. Eyeballing it, it's about 75% lowercase to 25% uppercase. Panini! • 🥪 05:08, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, right, this sentence often slips my mind because it is hidden at the end of another bullet point way, way down. Perhaps we should make it more prominent. My quick Google search roughly mirrors Panini!'s findings, and the same checks out for "id Tech", it seems. However, I see a greater split for "S&box" vs "s&box", with at least my results favoring the former (approx. 4:1). Do you see a parallel between the two cases? IceWelder [✉] 07:06, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assassin's Creed Shadows

[edit]

There's a discussion on Assassin's Creed Shadows here that we could use help resolving. The first question is about whether or not the material on the portrayal of the main character Yasuke should get its own subsection (the relevant material is currently in the subsection Portrayal of Yasuke), and what section it should it go into. The second question is whether or not this should be mentioned in the lead. Truthnope (talk) 00:17, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your annual reminder that the GDC official Flickr page has tons of Commons-eligible photographs

[edit]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/officialgdc/with/54403451284 The awards show is a great place to get a cropped photo of some indie devs. Upload the original to Commons, then upload your crop with a link to the original. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:36, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you happen to stumble across a pic of Dennis Gustafsson, please let me know! IceWelder [✉] 21:42, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very list-like stubs

[edit]

While going through the project's biography stubs, I noticed many that have grown into what are basically lists of the person's work. Just wanted to get people's thoughts as to how these should be approached. If there is room for these to grow as biographies, obviously they should remain as articles. But if the sources don't exist beyond a filmography/ludography, should these be renamed and categorized as lists? I admit I'm working with gaps of knowledge because I don't know what sources are out there for the individuals and that this may have to be approached case-by-case rather than as a broad policy.

A sampling of the larger such pages for reference:

Curious what others think. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:45, 23 March 2025 (UTC))[reply]

Simple, if they pass WP:NPERSON they can be expanded; if they fail, they should be deleted. WP:NLIST requires there to be a main article for a filmography to exist. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:58, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

EA (service) and EA App (application)

[edit]

From what I understand, EA service is a digital rights management system previously known as Origin, and it is still the same service, and EA service still supports (yet) both new EA App and old Origin applications, so why there is mentioned "EA Desktop" in the lead, which was the name for EA App PC beta? We can distinguish service and its applications as separate things. Eurohunter (talk) 20:49, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the page to "EA App" because that is the name of the product the replaced Origin when they dropped the name. There may be services by EA that back most of their games on both computer and consoles, but Origin / EA App is the dedicated launcher for Windows users (hence why EA Desktop also applies). Masem (t) 22:45, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Articles (March 17 to March 23)

[edit]
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 18:34, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 17

March 18

March 19

March 20

March 21

March 22

March 23

--PresN 18:34, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Little bit concerned on Minecraft speedrunning. A significant part of that is going into speedrun strategies which seems to be overkill, and if that's removed, this is more an appropriate section in a general speedrunning or Minecraft article. Masem (t) 03:13, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't doubt the concept being notable but it may need to be rewritten. I myself am admittedly concerned with List of fictional cats in video games since that seems to fail Wikipedia:INDISCRIMINATE, among other things. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 13:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Second here, considering how Mario speedrunning also doesn't have standalone articles even with more significant coverage from Summoning Salt... MilkyDefer 13:21, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When I was more active, I would write extensive sections on speedrunning in this article, which has since been deleted. I like the idea of separate articles on speedrunning in specific video games, as it's an activity/community I care about. No one had bothered to write such articles before, I think, but Minecraft being such a singular game makes it a good first article for it. As long as the article follows the sources, I'm not too worried about it going too in-the-weeds on things. I think it's doing a fine job with potential for expansion. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:42, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, I don't think Summoning Salt would be considered an acceptable source. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:21, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
List of fictional cats in video games seems not necessary or suitable for Wikipedia, but maybe that's just me? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 06:37, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Game Informer is back

[edit]

They're back, babey! Yes, that includes the print magazine, and the team has returned. The linked letter from the editor remarks that the website and its backlog is coming back online (example: Veilguard pre-release coverage hub). It's all in process, so some stuff might take a hot minute. But, if you're aware of anything that was lost due to the magazine going down, I don't know if anything ended up removed due to dead links, those articles are back in luck! There's also some new reviews and coverage being posted for things that came out or happened during their hiatus and a new 2024 best of list. Good news for us, and for games journalism. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 20:24, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but that also means that any of the GI magazines that are now available on Internet Archive and Retromags, for example, are going to be nuked at any moment's notice so, better grab those PDFs before they're gone! Roberth Martinez (talk) 21:18, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The site still seems a little slow for me (on a Mac with Chrome), but once the kinks get worked out, a WP:URLREQ should be made to set all the references from "dead" to "live". Here is the original request Sariel Xilo made back in August when the site went offline. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:28, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.gameinformer.com/subscribe - looks like creating a free account allows for (some degree of) access to a old content of theirs? Sergecross73 msg me 22:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's for magazine archive access. Old URLs should be live again (for example their Batman Arkham City review here). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:09, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At the time of my request, only 2 refs linked directly to the digital edition of the magazine (Veilguard issue - https://gameinformer.mydigitalpublication.com/publication/?i=824318) & that link is still dead. Print sources don't require links so there might be more refs that cite the print magazine over the website that weren't found (but also, they don't need to be updated). Sariel Xilo (talk) 16:44, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I made the request at URLREQ here to have the online citations changed from |url-status=dead to |url-status=live since the online archive has returned. This is separate from any use of the magazine (print or digital) for citations. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 19:17, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Right! Mostly added a clarification that access to the magazine isn't really a concern in terms of refs since you & Sergecross73 mentioned that access to the digital magazine has changed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 19:30, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Advanced access

[edit]

I'm surprised we don't have a page on the general topic of video game release, because as this page stands it's very WP:DICDEF, and I think it should almost certainly be merged, but I have no idea where to. Anyone have an idea? ~ A412 talk! 20:07, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that advanced access article is awful (and not the common name for the term either.) It's only existed for like a day. I redirected it to Glossary of video game terms, which is probably where any release stuff should go. Sergecross73 msg me 20:31, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"early access" has been used too, though the definition here is not congruent with what early access has typically meant. That said I know the early access page has a brief discussion on this approach since it's closely related. — Masem (t) 21:03, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, sorry, didn't see that until just now. I'm fine with it redirecting wherever, but it doesn't need a separate article by...any metric. Sergecross73 msg me 21:17, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Serge. ~ A412 talk! 21:24, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But won't impetuously redirecting the article to the wrong glossary explanation do more harm than leaving it as-is? MilkyDefer 06:37, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, feel free to redirect to early access or wherever else. Sergecross73 msg me 20:05, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello, fellow wikipedians! I am here to announce my new (and ambitious) project to improve Wii U related articles on Wikipedia:

edit | discuss
Nintendo Wii U
6 articles
Wii U GamePad
Off-TV Play
Wii U system software
Wii U Pro Controller
List of Wii U games
List of best-selling Wii U video games

Currently, i have Wii U GamePad as a nomination and Off TV Play is getting peer reviewed for a potential featured list. The main article, Wii U was delisted last week. However, i believe that collabarating together we can all improve the coverage and reliabity of Wii U related arictles on Wikipedia. The Wii U was a failure, and therefore not a ton of attention was poured onto Wii U related articles back when it was relevant. Let me know how you all feel about this. TzarN64 (talk) 04:17, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At the very least, it seems like Off-TV Play has major WP:OVERLAP issues with the Wii U GamePad. Looking at the sources, I am also heavily doubtful that it passes WP:GNG. Given that only the Wii U GamePad is capable of this feature, and it is not something that was carried across consoles, etc., it should probably be merged to Wii U GamePad#Features. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:41, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Zxcvbnm, you think i should just BOLDly merge off tv play then? TzarN64 (talk) 04:54, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt there would be much backlash if you did. I'm usually the one to oppose merging stuff (i.e. Nintendo DS Lite) so if I think it's too much, I'm not sure anyone else wouldn't. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:55, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. Thank you for your time! TzarN64 (talk) 05:00, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I object to this merge, please stop repeatedly attempting to merge this after such a brief discussion without hardly any participation. Its reception section is written with reliable sources written specifically about the subject with significant coverage. It received detailed coverage by outlets like []Eurogamer]]'s Digital Foundry. I knows there's coverage that the concept help influence the Switch too. Sergecross73 msg me 12:44, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do concur with Zx that there's some considerable overlap here given cross tv play is inherently a mechanic intrinsically tied with the Wii U Gamepad; I'm not seeing much sourcing wise that would indicate a necessary split, at least at a glance. Even coverage covering the feature itself is still tied to its use in the Gamepad. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 15:29, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, it wasn't "split", it was started from scratch, 13 years ago. Sergecross73 msg me 15:53, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that. Admittedly that was unclear wording on my part, but what I mean by split is more or less just as a separate article. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 21:38, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There was not a review at all for Talk:Wii U GamePad/GA1. This might need to be reassessed. GamerPro64 00:13, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have just gone ahead and reverted the passing, and returned it to the queue as /GA2. This was not a valid review. I'm sure the article can reach GA, but it needs more than a single word review to show that someone actually checked. --PresN 00:34, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeesh, that's pretty similar to why the Wii U itself lost its GA status. Not sure why people keep thinking they can skip the review process... Sergecross73 msg me 02:12, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure this was not an attempt to game the system by bypassing the review; I think we just need to be more proactive with following the GA criteria. Both Tzar and the reviewer are fairly new to editing, after all. To @TzarN64 and @User:Freedoxm, if you have any questions about the GA process, whether that be general breakdowns of how they work or a quick "am I doing this right", feel free to let me know on my talk page and I'll gladly walk you through it. Panini! • 🥪 05:01, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Freedoxm is currently conducting an actual review of Wii U GamePad at the moment. I was surprised when i saw the article getting passed with hardly an review at all- But i'm unfamiliar with the GA review process and thought nothing that much of it. TzarN64 (talk) 05:07, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Thanks! 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 05:51, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Articles (March 24 to March 30)

[edit]
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 13:49, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 24

March 25

March 26

March 27

March 28

March 29

  • None

March 30

--PresN 13:49, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for 24: The Game

[edit]

24: The 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. Z1720 (talk) 18:14, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion needed on Template talk:Nintendo hardware

[edit]

The discussion is not going anywhere on Template talk:Nintendo hardware#Further categorization and I could not seek a third opinion. Anyone interested in chiming in? « Ryūkotsusei » 02:58, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Switch 2 Editions"

[edit]

Something I figure we're going to need to come to agreement on in the community: "Nintendo Switch 2 Editions" are their name for Switch 1 games that will have paid upgrades that will only run on a Nintendo Switch 2. From as far as I can tell, the "upgrades" vary per game. For Breath of the Wild, it just appears to be a resolution/frame rate boost, while Mario Party Jamboree appears to be new gameplay additions only accessible on a Switch 2.

Things we'll need to decide on:

  1. Does this count as a "Switch 2 game" when it comes to categories, game lists, etc?
  2. Is this a separate release/platform to be noted in an infobox?

It may be too early to decide, but at the same time, this stuff is getting added and remove across my watchlist already, so I figured it shouldn't wait either.

Thoughts? Sergecross73 msg me 14:40, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would say for the first one that Category:Nintendo Switch 2 enhanced games should be created, using Category:PlayStation 5 enhanced games as precedent. Probably should be noted as a separate release on the infobox as well. (Oinkers42) (talk) 14:45, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As Oinkers said, they're equivalent to PS5 enhanced games. Not a Switch 2 game or a separate release. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:51, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The key difference here is that Nintendo appears to making you pay for that privilege of the enhanced version, which was not the case for ps5 enhanced games. That throws a wrench into this comparison. Masem (t) 15:28, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since it appears all Switch 2 editions require an upgrade, I would say that those switch 1 games qualify as Switch 2 games as well in terms of platform lists. Switch 1 games that are just playable but without enhancements should remain only as Switch 1 games. Masem (t) 14:51, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this is the way I'm leaning at the moment. Sergecross73 msg me 14:53, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do think they should be listed separately on the main list though. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:09, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Nintendo has now confirmed that not all such upgrades will cost money [1] As such that might go against including every such game in the platform. If it is a case when there is significant new content like in Mario party jamboree, that would be fair, but not every enhanced game. Masem (t) 15:50, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it sounds like there's basically 3 tiers.
  1. Switch 2 Editions - actual new content or performance boosts
  2. Switch 2 Free Updates - updates that just help with game compatibility or minor hiccups
  3. Games that are just Switch 1 games that run on a Switch 2 (probably majority of the library.)
If this is correct, I'd only consider #1 a "Switch 2" game (which wouldn't be WP:OR if they're clearly tagged with a "Switch 2 Edition" label.) Sergecross73 msg me 15:55, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with this reading so far. Would like to see how third party games are handled to confirm. Masem (t) 16:12, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games&oldid=1283617817"