Template talk:Video game reviews: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Request: WorthPlaying: new section |
|||
| (46 intermediate revisions by 21 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Permanently protected}} |
{{Permanently protected}} |
||
{{talkheader}} |
{{talkheader}} |
||
| ⚫ | |||
{{Tfdend|date=2010 January 2 |result=keep }} |
{{Tfdend|date=2010 January 2 |result=keep }} |
||
{{Merged-from|Template:Video game multiple platforms reviews|30 October 2013}} |
{{Merged-from|Template:Video game multiple platforms reviews|30 October 2013}} |
||
| Line 12: | Line 11: | ||
}} |
}} |
||
{{FAQ|collapsed=no}} |
{{FAQ|collapsed=no}} |
||
{{WikiProject banner shell| |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
}} |
|||
{{Lua sidebar}} |
{{Lua sidebar}} |
||
== |
== Request to add reviewer == |
||
Tilt must have the most convoluted scoring system in gaming history: "interest" is scored on a scale of 0-20, "graphics, animation, sound effects, +dozen others" seems to be a 6 star system (not 5), and then there are "language and price" that for some reason get a letter grade (A to F, but why are they using that when academic grading in France is 0-20). I guess "interest" is the overall score but some games like Ultima 4 don't get even that. [[User:Mika1h|Mika1h]] ([[User talk:Mika1h|talk]]) 23:20, 8 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*Do you have an example? Those I have spotchecked have a lot of subcategories scored 0-20 plus a 0-20 overall average score, a letter grade for the price, and a word descriptor (medium, high, etc.) for difficulty. Ex http://download.abandonware.org/magazines/Tilt/tilt_numero101/tilt%20-%20n%C2%B0101%20-%20avril%201992%20-%20page054%20et%20055.jpg. <span style="background:black;padding:1px 4px">[[User:Salvidrim!|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:white">Ben · Salvidrim!</span>]] [[User talk:Salvidrim!|<span style="color:white">✉</span>]]</span> 01:14, 21 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Actually the letter "grade" for the price is not a subjective ranking, it is directly mapped to specific price brackets in Francs: https://i.imgur.com/kfYJmfl.png <span style="background:black;padding:1px 4px">[[User:Salvidrim!|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:white">Ben · Salvidrim!</span>]] [[User talk:Salvidrim!|<span style="color:white">✉</span>]]</span> 01:20, 21 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== OpenCritic == |
|||
I was just wondering what other people thought about possibly adding OpenCritic as a review aggregator next to Metacritic. For the last few years OpenCritic has been gaining a lot more attention on social media, forums, websites and basically any other place used to discuss video games. I think it would be worth considering, also because OpenCritic does not use weighted average, unlike Metacritic. Poklane 12:10, 5 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:<small>Not really relevant to the discussion, but your signature should at least have a link to your talk page per [[WP:CUSTOMSIG/P]]. – [[User:Rhain|<span style="color: #008;">'''''Rhain'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Rhain|☔]] <small>([[he/him]])</small> 12:54, 5 May 2023 (UTC)</small> |
|||
I wish to suggest ''Final Weapon''. I was planning to add [https://finalweapon.net/2024/09/09/concord-review-a-puzzling-release-now-lost-to-time/ this review] of ''[[Concord (video game)|Concord]]''. [[User:ISD|ISD]] ([[User talk:ISD|talk]]) 18:28, 9 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:OpenCritic has had multiple discussions are WP:VG, WP:VG/S, and I believe MOS:VG. Those discussions thus far have not resulted in it being treated as a reliable, nor as necessary or desired alongside Metacritic. It certainly will not be added to the template until a consensus to use it is established. -- [[User:Ferret|ferret]] ([[User_talk:Ferret|talk]]) 13:55, 5 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Rather disingenous to accuse Opencritic of not being 'reliable' when there have been several concerns raised over the years about the opacity Metacritic's scoring system and their differential weighting to certain review sources. What exactly would the criteria to determine whether or not it is reliable? |
|||
::The fact remains that it is a currently major aggregator and the second biggest after Metacritic. The same way multiple review sources are listed in the template without passing any judgement on their perceived reliability, and allowing the reader to come to their own conclusions, seems to me the most sensible way to proceed - list it alongside Metacritic and give people the opportunity and respect to appraise it themselves. Not having it in the template is a disservice to the reader IMO. [[User:Armuk|Armuk]] ([[User talk:Armuk|talk]]) 18:25, 17 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::"Reliable" in this context refers to [[WP:RS]], our guideline. I am not making any personal statement that I believe OpenCritic lies or anything like that. I am also simply relaying to you the current project consensus. This template will not add OpenCritic while that consensus stands. -- [[User:Ferret|ferret]] ([[User_talk:Ferret|talk]]) 19:13, 17 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::My point remains unchanged - what exactly is the specific criteria used to make a determination on its so-called reliability? Who is it that the consensus must be derived from? The linked guideline lists some broad principles but answers neither question. |
|||
::::The faceless monolith that Wikipedia has becomes seems to be far removed from its initial purpose of the democratic provision of information. [[User:Armuk|Armuk]] ([[User talk:Armuk|talk]]) 15:47, 20 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::There's so many discussions on OpenCritic that it is difficult for me to find the right most recent one. That, is indeed, an issue. However, to suggest we've somehow lost the "democratic provision" and aren't properly discussing and building consensus is just needlessly antagonistic. The last decision was a site-wide RFC. I'm looking for it now. -- [[User:Ferret|ferret]] ([[User_talk:Ferret|talk]]) 16:28, 20 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::[[Template_talk:Video_game_reviews/Archive_5#Adding OpenCritic as a review aggregator]] I believe is the last major RFC. There have been many other discussion even since then, including [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources/Archive_23#OpenCritic]]. -- [[User:Ferret|ferret]] ([[User_talk:Ferret|talk]]) 16:43, 20 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::So OpenCritic's last appraisal for suitability was in 2017, and the main point of opposition was essentially its perceived niche status, that it was not used to the same extent as Metacritic among the industry & consumer base. |
|||
:::::::Six years on, that status quo has certainly changed; OpenCritic is now a major player in the space. Given that the primary argument against is largely no longer valid, a re-assessment as to its inclusion in 2023 is now most definitely warranted. [[User:Armuk|Armuk]] ([[User talk:Armuk|talk]]) 17:34, 21 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::You're free to make that argument and broach the subject at [[MOS:VG]]. Determining the both the reliability ''and'' suitability of OpenCritic's use would best be a topic for that page. -- [[User:Ferret|ferret]] ([[User_talk:Ferret|talk]]) 18:33, 21 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::I would suggest it's worth another discussion. Reading through the previous topics on this, most were quite long ago. OpenCritic has since been implemented in more places such as [https://www.gog.com/news/gog_2022_update_6_opencritic_reviews_on_our_gamecards GOG.com] and has had updates. |
|||
:::::::::Beyond that, some of the arguments against fell into the category of 'we have MetaCritic already', which isn't an argument against OpenCritic's reliability itself. As well as this, with OpenCritic's wider pool of vetted critics, there are niche titles that are not scored on MetaCritic, but are on OpenCritic, so it could be useful at least for those times. [[User:DarkeruTomoe|DarkeruTomoe]] ([[User talk:DarkeruTomoe|talk]]) 20:24, 21 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:This source needs evaluated by [[WP:VG/S]] first. -- [[User:Ferret|ferret]] ([[User_talk:Ferret|talk]]) 18:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Several "generalist" outlets == |
|||
== Request to add a reviewer == |
|||
Could we add a number of generalist outlets, at least for their reviews of AAA+ titles? For example, there are "scored" reviews for ''Tears of the Kingdom'' from major generalist sources not in the module atm: |
|||
* [https://www.ft.com/content/59857bcc-77cb-472c-b001-adb5e25fd4f0 ''Financial Times''] (4/5 stars) |
|||
* [https://www.standard.co.uk/tech/gaming/legend-of-zelda-tears-of-the-kingdom-review-nintendo-switch-b1080324.html ''Evening Standard''] (5/5 stars) |
|||
* [https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/gaming/1769893/Legend-of-Zelda-Tears-of-the-Kingdom-Nintendo-Switch-review-Breath-of-the-Wild ''Daily Express''] (5/5 stars) |
|||
[[User:Juxlos|Juxlos]] ([[User talk:Juxlos|talk]]) 04:14, 22 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:''Daily Express'' is [[WP:DAILYEXPRESS|unreliable]], so a definite ''no'', while ''Evening Standard'' has [[WP:RSP#Evening Standard|no consensus]] and would likely need further discussion at [[WT:VG/S]] or [[WP:RSN]] first. ''Financial Times'' is [[WP:RSP#Financial Times|reliable]] but I'm not sure they actually [https://www.ft.com/gaming review games enough] to justify inclusion in the template; if editors feel a review is particularly important, I'd recommend using the custom parameters instead. – [[User:Rhain|<span style="color: #008;">'''''Rhain'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Rhain|☔]] <small>([[he/him]])</small> 04:26, 22 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
::Agree with Rhain's view. The customer reviewer fields exists for one off situations like this. -- [[User:Ferret|ferret]] ([[User_talk:Ferret|talk]]) 13:33, 22 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::FWIW, ''Financial Times'' does review a number of games, but I suppose they only do it for 2-3 games a month. Can someone guide me through using the custom parameters? [[User:Juxlos|Juxlos]] ([[User talk:Juxlos|talk]]) 07:36, 23 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::{{yo|Juxlos}} Of course. For the example mentioned above, you'd just use two parameters: {{para|rev1|''[[Financial Times]]''}} and {{para|rev1Score|4/5}} (or replace "rev1" with "rev2", "rev3", etc.). – [[User:Rhain|<span style="color: #008;">'''''Rhain'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Rhain|☔]] <small>([[he/him]])</small> 12:11, 23 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::I don't know how come I didn't see that in the template documentation earlier. Oh well, thanks. [[User:Juxlos|Juxlos]] ([[User talk:Juxlos|talk]]) 12:42, 23 May 2023 (UTC) |
|||
I would like to add [[Pure Xbox|''Pure Xbox'']] (Abbreviated as PX). It is the Xbox version of ''Nintendo Life'' and ''Push Square'', both of which are already in the template, and it has already been evaluated by [[WP:VG/S]]. <b>[[User:MKsLifeInANutshell|<span style="color:blue">MK</span>]] [[User talk:MKsLifeInANutshell|<span style="color:orange">at your service.</span>]]</b> 14:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Template-protected edit request on 1 June 2023 == |
|||
==Request to update title parameter== |
|||
{{edit template-protected|Module:Video game reviews/data|answered=no}} |
|||
Is there a way to change the title and subtitle parameter? The text for these does not show well in dark mode. See [[Berzerk_(video_game)#Reception]] for an example (through Dark mode obviously!) [[User:Andrzejbanas|Andrzejbanas]] ([[User talk:Andrzejbanas|talk]]) 11:39, 3 October 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== |
==Request change in the 1Up.com wikilink== |
||
I noticed that ''1Up.com'' had been merged to form the ''[[1Up Network]]'' a few years ago. Can you consider changing it to <code>"{ "''[[1Up Network|1Up.com]]''", '1UP' }"</code> in [[Module:Video game reviews/data]] to avoid a redirect? --[[User:Angeldeb82|Angeldeb82]] ([[User talk:Angeldeb82|talk]]) 21:46, 2 November 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:IMHO, the rename of the article should be reverted. It is principally about the website. The podcast network is a subtopic. [[User:IceWelder|<span style="font-variant: small-caps;">IceWelder</span>]] [[[User talk:IceWelder|<span style="color: #424242;">✉</span>]]] 18:57, 3 November 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[https://worthplaying.com/news/reviews/ WorthPlaying] has various game reviews. This reviewer listed in Metacritic. Just adding <code>|WP=</code> on a template. [[User:Windywalk|Windywalk]] ([[User talk:Windywalk|talk]]) 16:43, 4 June 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::When I try to get to the ''[[1Up.com]]'' article link, it always redirects to the ''[[1Up Network]]'' article instead. [[User:Angeldeb82|Angeldeb82]] ([[User talk:Angeldeb82|talk]]) 19:38, 3 November 2024 (UTC) |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
Latest revision as of 20:14, 3 November 2024
 | Template:Video game reviews is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories.
Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Video game reviews template. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 2 months  |
 | This template was considered for deletion on 2010 January 2. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
 | The contents of the Template:Video game multiple platforms reviews page were merged into Template:Video game reviews on 30 October 2013. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
|
| Related pages |
|---|
Request to add reviewer
[edit]I wish to suggest Final Weapon. I was planning to add this review of Concord. ISD (talk) 18:28, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- This source needs evaluated by WP:VG/S first. -- ferret (talk) 18:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
Request to add a reviewer
[edit]I would like to add Pure Xbox (Abbreviated as PX). It is the Xbox version of Nintendo Life and Push Square, both of which are already in the template, and it has already been evaluated by WP:VG/S. MK at your service. 14:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
Request to update title parameter
[edit]Is there a way to change the title and subtitle parameter? The text for these does not show well in dark mode. See Berzerk_(video_game)#Reception for an example (through Dark mode obviously!) Andrzejbanas (talk) 11:39, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
Request change in the 1Up.com wikilink
[edit]I noticed that 1Up.com had been merged to form the 1Up Network a few years ago. Can you consider changing it to "{ "1Up.com", '1UP' }" in Module:Video game reviews/data to avoid a redirect? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 21:46, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- IMHO, the rename of the article should be reverted. It is principally about the website. The podcast network is a subtopic. IceWelder [✉] 18:57, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- When I try to get to the 1Up.com article link, it always redirects to the 1Up Network article instead. Angeldeb82 (talk) 19:38, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. It was moved. IceWelder [✉] 20:14, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- When I try to get to the 1Up.com article link, it always redirects to the 1Up Network article instead. Angeldeb82 (talk) 19:38, 3 November 2024 (UTC)