But you can go to an explosion and E3 2008. Well, if you had a time machine you could. Point is, a "jungle" is a place generic setting where a level take place, it's an idea... A CONCEPT... ;)
Seems like they think it's a game review site... That's just weird... I mean, it's so obvious that the focus of this site is to be an information resource and gaming community first. Everything else is secondary.
Then what about my favorite example (I've atleast mentioned it 10 times already in different topics) which is Super Street Fighter 2 and Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo... How could anyone argue ever that these game deserves separate entries when FFIV doesn't? Or regular Street Fighter 2 and Street Fighter 2 Turbo. I really don't think the GB staff would go for merging those games ever, but don't think anyone can argue in what way they are MORE different than FFIV and FFIVDS.
For example, if Street Fighter 2 when through the exact same visual update that FFIV did recently (including things like 3D graphics and EX style 3D effects and an appropriate amount of minor additions) everyone and their grandma would argue that this is a completely different game.
And we can't really make exceptions because that will just create further discussions and a lot of crankyness... Maybe the easiest thing would be to think of it like this, if one labels a game as a port it should be merged, if one labels it a remake it should get its own page. Would create some redundancy sure, but atleast I think most people can wrap their head around that and accept it.
EDIT: I'd just like to add that It wouldn't solve all problems sure, I mean, a lot of the EA sports series are essentially rereleases with a new player database, and different gen versions of the "same" title do function completely different but it would solve alot of situations in one fell swoop.
Huh? I thought this topic was dead for sure... Anyway... So what should we base our decisions on? As I see it there are a couple of things that one could argue makes two games similar: Gameplay=If the basic game concept and ways how the game functions are similar or identical (the Genesis NHL games). Thus if a game functions in a noticeably different way than another they are the not same game. Code=They are almost identical in their programming, only difference is done in order to make necessary change in order to make a game work better or at all (Street Fighter 2 versions). Thus if a lot of code (ignoring translation information) is needed to be changed in order to turn one version into another they are the not same game. (might be tricky for us to check though in most cases) Graphical=The graphics are virtually identical, if downgrade the closest approximation possible to fit system (conversations in general). Thus if you can't IMMIDIETLY recognise the game in question from screenshots as a version of another game, assuming you're familiar with one of them, they are not the same game. Level design=The level are to as big degree as possible exactly the same (arcade ports). Thus if you can't use a walkthrough for another system to navigate a level it is not the same game. Storyline=A broad stroke outline of two games are the same they are the same game (Disgaea versions). Thus if you can't transfer a broad story outline to another version and have it fit perfectly they are not the same game. Features=A game has the same modes and features as another game (same gen multi-platform titles). Thus if a game does not have the exact same game modes they are not the same game.
There might very well be aspect I've forgotten but that's the gist of it. We need to decide which of these we should take into concideration and where to draw the line for all of them. And we have to be consistent. We can't have FF4 and FF4DS merged and at the same time keep Star Ocean and it's remake seperate. And we need to decide this early on. What do when priorotize and what do we overlook.
Well, no of course not. Especially older games were unable to depict locations in a realistic fashion. But they intend to be the same place, the same goes for hell. A jungle in a game intends to be a jungle, any jungle, anywhere, doesn't even have to be on Earth. No, jungle should be, if anything, a concept. I mean, if we allow jungle, why not have "desert"? Or "cave"? Or "city"? Or "building"? Every "desert", "cave", "city" and "building" share a number of commonalities with each other, it's equally valid to argue for them to be locations as much as arguing for jungle. In fact, desert is probably even more relevant.
Well, then the Vic Viper character page should only include Vic Viper from Zone of the Enders 2 and none of the other Vic Viper... Although I'm undecided whether I think that either Jehuty or ZoE2's Vic Viper are characters anyway... But either way, I don't believe people have that kind of restraint.
Actually, I'd say that Bubsy and Super Mario are more similar than than Sonic and Mario, it's sort of a mean between Mario and Sonic... It kinda tried to combine the best things of both games and kinda ended up... Not so much... Even though I personally have a soft spot for the first game. But it's not like it's a issue I'm gonna fight anyone on. I've got much more controversial ideas up my sleeves... :D
Well, my problem with the current location entry is that it serves for a number of completely different jungles. If you want a specific entry for the jungle stage in Contra then go right ahead, just don't added other games to that same entry if there's nothing to suggest that that game takes place in the very same jungle. So no, Metal Gear Solid 3, Donkey Kong Country or Cannon Fodder in there. Point is, a location is a specific place and "any kind of jungle anywhere" is not.
Log in to comment