What the hell is with the overview paragraph for Chrono Cross. This is a wiki, not a review, and whoever wrote this is seriously projecting their own opinions of the game into what is supposed to be unbiased, informative area of the site. Even if Chrono Cross was generally disliked (which it is not), this is not the way to convey that.

What the hell is with the overview paragraph for Chrono Cross. This is a wiki, not a review, and whoever wrote this is seriously projecting their own opinions of the game into what is supposed to be unbiased, informative area of the site. Even if Chrono Cross was generally disliked (which it is not), this is not the way to convey that.

If you see subjective content in the wiki, submit an edit to have it removed. I perform that act more often than I wish necessary, but what can I do?

@Hailinel said:

If you see subjective content in the wiki, submit an edit to have it removed. I perform that act more often than I wish necessary, but what can I do?

There truly is an art to channeling your subjective views on the game into an objective report for the wiki. You think I spent so much time working on the Sonic 4 Episode I page because I like that game? Fuck no, that entire leaks section is me being passive-aggressive about my hatred of the game and my glee in watching Sega suffer.

Well.. Yeah. I mean, I agree with the sentiment of the overview - character development is almost non-existent, there are way too many characters in the game all of which are more or less a single stereotype with no room to develop any of them because they felt the need to put so many in that development of their characters isn't plausible, and the plot is, indeed, confusing and bizarre. But the tone of it is a bit too opinion projecting.

The simple answer though - just fix it yourself. Lots of wiki pages end up with things that need fixing for one reason or another, so don't be afraid to go in there and change it. But if you are going to fix it, be sure to not let the pendulum swing the other way and project an opinion of how awesome you think the game is (not that you think this game is awesome, just, in general, for any game you do this for.)

That or I could just go fix it. It'd probably take me all of like five minutes.

Edit: And there you go, I just changed it. Should, hopefully, be more objective sounding now. Not entirely happy with it, I feel it could sound better, but, hey, at least it's more objective and less opinionated sounding now. But anyone that wants to go and change it out for something that sounds better, by all means, please do.

@iAmJohn said:

@Hailinel said:

If you see subjective content in the wiki, submit an edit to have it removed. I perform that act more often than I wish necessary, but what can I do?

There truly is an art to channeling your subjective views on the game into an objective report for the wiki. You think I spent so much time working on the Sonic 4 Episode I page because I like that game? Fuck no, that entire leaks section is me being passive-aggressive about my hatred of the game and my glee in watching Sega suffer.

My work done on the NBA Elite 11 page was born out of pure schadenfreude.

@Hailinel said:

@iAmJohn said:

@Hailinel said:

If you see subjective content in the wiki, submit an edit to have it removed. I perform that act more often than I wish necessary, but what can I do?

There truly is an art to channeling your subjective views on the game into an objective report for the wiki. You think I spent so much time working on the Sonic 4 Episode I page because I like that game? Fuck no, that entire leaks section is me being passive-aggressive about my hatred of the game and my glee in watching Sega suffer.

My work done on the NBA Elite 11 page was born out of pure schadenfreude.

You did a public service. That is a story people need to know. That's also what I keep telling myself about said Sonic 4 page.

While I've never had the impression that the wiki is intended to be purely objective and formal, having content that clearly expresses the writer's opinion, usually in a petty-sounding way, is too much.

But this does make me wonder if I'm allowed to call a game broken. Opinions?

@Kovie said:

While I've never had the impression that the wiki is intended to be purely objective and formal, having content that clearly expresses the writer's opinion, usually in a petty-sounding way, is too much.

But this does make me wonder if I'm allowed to call a game broken. Opinions?

If the game is legitimately broken I don't see why not. Maybe you should check to see if the game was ever fixed? Write a paragraph detailing its previous brokenness, if that's the case?

@Kovie said:

While I've never had the impression that the wiki is intended to be purely objective and formal, having content that clearly expresses the writer's opinion, usually in a petty-sounding way, is too much.

But this does make me wonder if I'm allowed to call a game broken. Opinions?

If a game is busted, then the writer should take care to explain how and why the game is broken in an objective manner. It's one thing to say, "Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing is a busted piece of shit." It's another to say that "Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing suffers from a variety of critical issues, most of which were never patched. For example..."

@Kovie said:

While I've never had the impression that the wiki is intended to be purely objective and formal, having content that clearly expresses the writer's opinion, usually in a petty-sounding way, is too much.

But this does make me wonder if I'm allowed to call a game broken. Opinions?

Only if it's justified in the wiki entry.

Okay, thanks. I'll definitely write more on it at a later date.

Wow I remember I got rid of some critiques like that against the game a long time ago that were in the wiki. Sad to see them sprout back up.

Does Sonic 4 actually count as a cancelled episodic series? What indication is there that it was meant to go on for more than 2 episodes? That's like saying Sonic 3 was a cancelled episodic series because there are no more chapters after Sonic & Knuckles.

@egg said:

Does Sonic 4 actually count as a cancelled episodic series? What indication is there that it was meant to go on for more than 2 episodes? That's like saying Sonic 3 was a cancelled episodic series because there are no more chapters after Sonic & Knuckles.

Where does it say that? Plus depending on when it was written, if it is in there, it could have been written before episode 2 came out, which would have been when most people figured they just canceled the project all together since episode 2 was supposed to come out shortly after episode 1. Except then it didn't, and Sonic Generations came out, and there was no word on an episode 2 at all, leaving a lot of people to think that Sega just ditched the whole thing due to how Episode 1 was received. That ended up not being the case, but, like I said, depending on when it was written, if it is in fact in there, that could be the reason for it.

man you are right @ll_Exile_ll that is bad and more importantly inaccurate. If I can find time, I'll see if I can improve it.

EDIT: I went ahead and tried to spiffy it up a little to fit more AP style. If anyone wants to correct/improve it further, please do so.