Wikipedia

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games

(Redirected from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Castlevania)
Latest comment: 1 day ago by Jeffrey34555 in topic Requested move at Talk:Hasbro Interactive#Requested move 1 June 2026
Learn more about this page

Any reliable sources for Fate/Extra CCC?

edit
Latest comment: 7 days ago9 comments4 people in discussion

Right now it is a redirect. I don't see anything on MobyGames or Metacritic. Ja wiki has ja:Fate/EXTRA CCC with quite a few refs, but no reception section. If we can find enough sources to estabilish notability, I'll try to write something up. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:15, 26 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Siliconera has written a couple of (short) articles, which you've probably already seen: (among others).
Apparently, there's also coverage of CCC in TYPE-MOON Ace vol. 8, including interviews. I don't have a copy of the magazine to verify, though, and it's primary sourcing.
The closest I've seen to reception is this page. Make of it what you will... Beyond the sources in ja:Fate/EXTRA CCC, I haven't seen much else covering CCC. Kodning 🌸 (talk) 06:15, 27 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Famitsu's cross-review of it is available on their site: https://www.famitsu.com/game/title/24587/reviews --AlexandraIDV 08:17, 27 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, I remember reading about it back in the day after enjoying the first Fate/Extra, but I only really remember the short Siliconera blurb-type stuff Alexandra already linked above. The PSP was pretty much wrapping up by this point, and particularly in English-language regions.
The only additional source I found was that Rice Digital review, which is apparently situational as long as they're not reporting on things they have ties to, which I don't think they do to this game. Not a real strong review though either.
That said, it seems like there's been an increase in interest/article creations with Fate stuff lately, so maybe one of those editors will provide something better Sergecross73 msg me 12:24, 27 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! From what I know, the game was only available in Japanese, so if there are sources, they will be Japanese. Famitsu is a RS, I think. Do we have any Japanese speakers who could do a search for sources in Japanese? (These days I guess I can also ask AI, but they still inferior to people experts, who can find stuff in IA or such...). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:35, 27 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, it got an unofficial fan translation, but it happened so far after the fact (2023) that I think this Time Extension article is really the only RS that reported on it. Sergecross73 msg me 18:20, 27 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Alexandra IDV @Kodning @Sergecross73 Thank you all for the sources, I was able to write a decent article, I hope (feel free to take a look). Is there anything that suggests notability for Fate/Extella Link? That one doesn't even have a ja wiki stand-alone article, suprisingly enough. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:50, 4 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Wow, the CCC article came together nicely. A cursory search of Link turned up good results, given it's a more recent game:
English:
Japanese:
Metacritic: Kodning 🌸 (talk) 06:53, 4 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Kodning Thank you, I will work on the article using the sources you found over the coming weeks :) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:06, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

UFO 50 list

edit
Latest comment: 12 days ago9 comments5 people in discussion

Hi everyone,

The quirky game that UFO 50 is, it consists of 50 games. Some small, some large. And as such, the article has become too unwieldy. I've never had an issue with removing unsourced material, but I can't tell what's worth keeping and what should go. Or just a List of games in UFO 50? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:03, 29 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Honestly, it feels like the best thing to do would be to make a list table with !game, !director, and a short paragraph explaining the gameplay of each entry. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 19:14, 29 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
The article has a bunch of trivia that can be removed under "recurring themes", that alone should shorten it significantly. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:18, 31 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Delete every uncited section and see what people are actually writing about. We don't need our original research here, that's what fanwikis are for. If it turns out we are able to write a cited paragraph or two about every individual game, we can create a separate list for it when we get close to that. For now it's just easy cleanup. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:09, 31 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, it's an interesting situation. We wouldn't write about each individual mini-game in a Mario Party game, but at the same time, unlike MP, there doesn't seem to be much of a core experience tying it all together to focus on either. And unlike most video game compilations, you can't just link to respective games contained in the collection either, because, well, they largely don't exist.
I guess it comes down to sourcing. If you have the (third party reliable) sources to describe every game, go for it. If not, then just choose a few example games that can be sourced and frame it as examples rather than a comprehensive summary of everything. (This approach, while more encyclopedic if that's all sourcing can do, will probably require infinite maintenance from newbies though, who will find it compulsory to add everything I'm sure.) Sergecross73 msg me 15:01, 31 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
We always have to push back against users trying to insert more trivial information, such as listing minor characters or level structures. It's also not unlike any anthology or short story collection, and as a project we do have a lot of experience writing about those. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:05, 1 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Of course. I'm not saying it should dictate what we do, I'm just saying be prepared for constant pushback. Not listing out every game would probably be seen as counter-intuitive to anyone not moderately experienced in Wikipedia policy. Sergecross73 msg me 15:12, 1 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
I would say that it shouldn't be an issue to find third-party sources, as I've seen plenty of ranking lists that verify facts about every entry of UFO 50. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 07:47, 1 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, I hadn't heard of it until recently, but it appears that its gotten a lot of attention, so I believe its possible. Probably worth attempting at least. I don't think its worth splitting into its own article though. Considering how much of the article is about listing out the games, I don't think there would be enough left to sustain a general article. (Also, that "recurring themes" section probably needs heavy cutting/reworking too.) Sergecross73 msg me 15:12, 1 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

New Articles (May 25 to May 31)

edit
Latest comment: 12 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion
 A listing of all articles newly added to the Video Games Wikiproject (regardless of creation date). Generated by v3.23 of the RecentVGArticles script and posted by PresN. Bug reports and feature requests are appreciated. --PresN 16:51, 1 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

May 25

May 26

May 27

May 28

May 29

May 30

May 31

Changlog:

  • Fixed a bug where page "recreations" (article history restored for a deleted article) were not being treated the same as page "un-redirections"
  • Fixed a bug where page un-redirections/recreations were being ignored if the page was then moved (similar issue to the create + move problem from a couple weeks ago)

--PresN 16:51, 1 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I was very, very proud of myself for making Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4 and Hatsune Miku - The Planet of Wonder and Fragments of Wishes back to back. Two completely different tones lol. Îť NegativeMP1 20:14, 1 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Ex illis

edit
Latest comment: 6 days ago10 comments8 people in discussion

This has been tagged for notability concerns for 13 years. Please add reliable sources, or consider going to WP:AfD for merger or deletion. Bearian (talk) 19:23, 3 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Echoing the remarks from the other thread, could you not have dealt with it yourself? toby in solidarity 19:26, 3 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Bearian: Not only is this something you can do yourself, this page arguably doesn't even fall under this WikiProject. It looks like this more falls under board game / miniatures. Respectfully, if you don't care to do this yourself, why do you think anyone here should either. 13akoors (talk) 22:27, 3 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
FWIW, I've sourced about 250 articles in the past three months, and I don't know much about games to be able to evaluate what's a reliable source or not. That's why I asked for help. Bearian (talk) 22:44, 3 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
A quick google search is often sufficient for WP:BEFORE. You don't need to be familiar with the field-specific literature in order to bring an article to AfD. Other people can try to dig up specialist sources there if they exist :) ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:46, 4 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
I've done a quick search with my sources (see User:Vacant0/Sources#Board_games) and nothing popped out. Like, literally nothing. I think it's safe to say that it can be AfD'ed. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:29, 4 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
In the interest of WP:BEBOLD I have AfD'd it, but I have to echo the concerns that A) this does NOT belong in WikiProject Video Games, so posting things like this here is disruptive, and B) making others do AfDs can be seen as discourteous and poor Wikiquette as you are basically handing off responsibility to them if the AfD fails. It is not a good look, and you should be doing the AfD yourself or leaving well enough alone if you aren't sure. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:36, 5 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Minor technical note that you should've also posted to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Board and table games... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 23:55, 5 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thank you @Piotrus but for clarification to @Bearian they should only make a notice about tabletop games at WP Board and Table Games, because WP Video Games is not the correct place for this at all, as noted by users above. BOZ (talk) 20:35, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Trout received. Bearian (talk) 21:35, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Spoilers in article leads

edit
Latest comment: 2 days ago7 comments5 people in discussion

Is it appropriate to directly disclose a significant twist in the lead of a narrative game largely about that twist?

I'd like to resolve a difference of opinion with @~2026-16455-78 on the article And Roger in which we've made conflicting edits (see ) on whether to directly identify the game as one about dementia. In the end, the edit conflicts are more focused now on whether to mention this in the lead or not; the IP user has currently concealed it using a wikilink. I have mentioned the reveal of the character having dementia there as I think it's the defining narrative element and theme of the game and WP:SPOILER suggests not trying to conceal a plot element for a prospective player's benefit. The IP user, if I can paraphrase this colourful edit, considers this unnecessary disclosure and a highly compromising thing to reveal for a one-hour mystery game. Appreciate any thoughts on this.  (talk) 23:06, 5 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I mean WP:SPOILER seems pretty clear to me. If that's what's notable about the game, that's what's notable about the game. It's our job to document encyclopedic information, not sell video games. I'd say I'd probably try to bury it deep enough into the lead so that it doesn't show up in page previews but that's about it. As a reference, Doki Doki Literature Club has a pretty infamous spoiler that is explicitedly in the lead but tucked at the bottom of the first paragraph. Whipmywillows (talk) 23:32, 5 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Seems like a good best practice. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 23:54, 5 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thanks all that have participated. Sounds like the best way forward is to revert, but also be mindful of framing and maybe add a gameplay sentence to back-load the summary of the narrative, and not start with it.  (talk) 02:02, 6 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
I'd actually be against in the lead only since many might read it before playing it. It should explain a little bit more than promotional material but not explain the ending or plot twist unless it received individual coverage. — Dissident93 (talk) 03:04, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
It did receive individual coverage: every review cited in the article opens by discussing the twist and that it makes spoilers difficult. Kotaku and Aftermath disclose the nature of that twist directly. It is not spoiling for the sake of it; it's the single most identifiable aspect of the game's narrative, themes, and reception.  (talk) 04:57, 7 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
I sometimes try to avoid a spoiler in the lead by not addressing it, without clearly stating what it is. instead of saying "Luke finds out Darth Vader is his father" in the Empire Strikes Back article, it says "Set three years after the events of Star Wars, the film recounts the battle between the malevolent Galactic Empire, led by the Emperor, and the Rebel Alliance, led by Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia. As the Empire goes on the offensive, Luke trains to master the Force so he can confront the Emperor's powerful disciple, Darth Vader" this does give the reader an idea of the story without "spoiling it" but also not really hiding what the basic premise of the story is. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:14, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Vertigo Games

edit
Latest comment: 5 days ago7 comments7 people in discussion

One of the biggest VR developers in the business (https://www.pcgamer.com/games/vr/one-of-the-biggest-vr-developers-in-the-business-closes-a-studio-the-vr-market-remains-a-challenging-space/) is a forever-redlinked for being "non-notable". ~2026-33760-55 (talk) 20:15, 8 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Do you think that it's notability status has changed since 2015? Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 20:19, 8 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
There's certainly room for a reevaluation after 11 years. The company has been around for a while and Embracer Group's acquisition in 2020 seems to have triggered more coverage. The title definitely shouldn't be salted. IceWelder [✉] 20:29, 8 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
It had been very "notable" before 2020 too (https://variety.com/2019/gaming/features/vertigo-games-believes-location-based-virtual-reality-is-future-of-vr-1203170003/).
I would note that the user who salted the article is now deceased. I guess the reason why it was salted was due to having several entries in the deletion log, but I guess this is now notable. JuniperChill (talk) 20:41, 8 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
If this happened a year or two later, I imagine that it would have been extended-confirmed protected rather than fully protected. Probably good enough basis to go to WP:RPP/D. ScalarFactor (talk) 20:51, 8 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Looks like this one may have got caught in the crossfire of a different Vertigo Games making Game Maker games which seems to have been repeatedly creating a bunch of WP:SPAM. Still full protection is absolutely unneccesary. Whipmywillows (talk) 21:34, 8 June 2026 (UTC
It should at the very least be a redirect to Embracer Group. OceanHok (talk) 01:10, 9 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Unsalted, do as you wish. --PresN 02:13, 9 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Fae Farm GAN

edit
Latest comment: 4 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Seeing as the original GAN reviewer of Fae Farm hasn't edited for more than a couple of weeks, and the secondary one is on a wikibreak, and the fact that it is currently the oldest GAN in the video games section (been marked as under review since 18 Feb(, I would like someone new to finish it off. JuniperChill (talk) 20:17, 8 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

@JuniperChill I can do it. -- ZooBlazer 17:16, 9 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
thank you ZooBlaster! JuniperChill (talk) 17:33, 9 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

How to name this category?

edit
Latest comment: 5 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Before I create it, I wanted to ask for best practices in naming. I am talking about a video game category for the video games listed in Category:Fan translation (there are many more examples in Fan translation of video games, which is not comprehensive anyway). Category:Fan translated video games, with Fan translation of video games being its main article and relevant categories moved to the new category from that article? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:10, 9 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Requested move discussion

edit
Latest comment: 4 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A requested move discussion has been opened at talk page on whether Senua (video game) should be moved to Senua. VG community is invited to participate in the discussion. Thanks! Umais🗣 08:30, 9 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Are Sports games Fighting games?

edit
Latest comment: 2 days ago8 comments3 people in discussion

Good evening, all. I'm currently working on a revamp of List of fighting games to convert it to a table structure. Current work is at User:13akoors/List of fighting games, for reference

While working on this page, I noticed that the vast majority of the items in the "Sports (combat) subgenres" section are not listed anywhere else on the page (295 out of the approx 305 games in this section). This led me down a rabbit hole of trying to figure out if these games even qualify as Fighting games.

The Fighting game page seems to indicate they shouldn't be, saying boxing games, mixed martial arts games, and wrestling games are often described as distinct genres, without comparison to fighting games, and belong more in the sports game genre. This is in line with what I've always thought, but the references on this statement say nothing like this, and I couldn't find anything like this online with a cursory search.

Does anyone have any guidance on whether these games should be treated as Fighting games, and how I should proceed with this page cleanup? 13akoors (talk) 00:21, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'm sure we could look up a lineage of it online, but generally games that are boxing or wrestling games are more close to the sports simulation games and less adapt to games that drew from the Street Fighter 2 mold. I'd try a basic google books search to clarify this but genres are often finnicky and some people apply rules that others do not. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:10, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
I agree that boxing and wrestling games tend to be more heavily inspired by their real life sports than Street Fighter II. My concern would be everything that came before SFII, so Karate Champ, Yie Ar Kung Fu, Street Fighter I, etc. My experience tells me these often look superficially similar to modern fighting games but don't play very similarly at all (There's often a heavy focus on single-player, minimal or no versus mode, no character selection, unsophisticated defensive play, etc.) These are often still called fighting games but I find it hard to come up with a reason why Karate Champ for example isn't a sports game, it's quite literally a simulation of competitive karate. I also find it very hard to come up with a reason why Punch Out wouldn't be included in this same category, it essentially shares the same format as Yie Ar Kung Fu but with an over the shoulder perspective.
My personal feeling is that combat sports games should be on the list but separated out as they currently are. But I would love for these early progenitors to either have their own section, "Proto-fighting games" or something like that or filtered into the combat sports section. I can go hunt to see if someone's published a book on the subject to justify this. Whipmywillows (talk) 18:48, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
That would definitely be helpful. I was struggling to find anything when searching, so even a solid link would help. 13akoors (talk) 19:08, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
I found some sources and a self-published book . Most of which seem to disagree with me, they say Karate Champ is definitely a fighting game (Sometimes the first fighting game, though I'd question why something like Heavyweight Champ doesn't count). If you're including dates then I don't have that much of a problem with it, either that or split it into "Early" fighting games and "Versus" fighting games.
Here's a good source: GMR September 2008 on page 52, "Punch Drunk Love". Also disagrees with me. Whipmywillows (talk) 19:13, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
I've put together a quick incomplete list of early fighting games that I'll probably keep adding to, User:Whipmywillows/sandbox/Pre-1991 fighting games. I don't think it should be that hard to figure out what is or isn't a fighting game past 1991, and that time period isn't really my area of expertise anyway. I also found this fantastic list from Hardcore Gaming 101, doesn't look much like a reliable source to me but it is on our list. Whipmywillows (talk) 20:29, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
I'm always a bit iffy on calling anything "proto-____" it sort of implies that the fighting game genre was inevitable, which isn't the case. (It's hard to imagine a video game world where Street Fighter II never happened though!) I would just try to find sources that go into detail about a game being a fighting game instead of us presuming it has to be one. There's definitely a before and after when Street Fighter II set the mold for these games, so it becomes complicated. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:13, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the assist, everyone. I'll look into the sources this week. 13akoors (talk) 22:04, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Resident Evil game title format in the template

edit
Latest comment: 3 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Given the attempt to start an edit war while ignoring the discussion, I'll repost the thread link here. I'm not advocating for one option or another, I'm just tired of watching people constantly change the "full game titles" format to "abbreviations only" (for examole, Resident Evil Zero vs Zero) and back again without any discussion. Solaire the knight (talk) 00:34, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

PCGamingWiki template

edit
Latest comment: 2 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi everyone,

Thoughts on {{PCGamingWiki}}? I xfd'ed it nearly two years ago. For those not familiar, PCGamingWiki is a wiki for PC gaming. Shock, huh? It helps PC players fix issues, that kind of stuff. I feel this was (and still is) an ELNO regardless, so the template is not needed. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:24, 11 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Requested move at Talk:History of Eastern role-playing video games#Requested move 25 May 2026

edit
Latest comment: 2 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:History of Eastern role-playing video games#Requested move 25 May 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPathtalk 02:10, 12 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Requested move at Talk:Hasbro Interactive#Requested move 1 June 2026

edit
Latest comment: 1 day ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Hasbro Interactive#Requested move 1 June 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 05:18, 12 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games&oldid=1358970940"