StrategyWiki:Staff lounge

__NEWSECTIONLINK__

Welcome to all users! This page is where you can ask StrategyWiki-related questions to the staff and senior community figures, and they will do their best to answer. New issues are entered here, with the most recent at the bottom of the page. If your question does not pertain to editing StrategyWiki (e.g. asking for hints or game-specific information), please ask on the guide's talk page or on the forums.

Please review the Table of Contents to see if your issue has already been raised; also check the archives (to the right) in case it was discussed some time ago.

To facilitate ease of browsing and replying, please:
 * 1) Place your question at the bottom of the list.
 * 2) Title the question (by placing the title between equals signs: ==Title==).
 * 3) Sign your name and date (by adding four tildes: ~ ).

Backward compatibility
Currently, there is a consideration to add all platforms that a game is playable on to its infobox. This includes platforms that offer backward compatibility (for example, all PS4 games can be purchased on the PS5's digital storefront, even though those games were not made for the PS5). The question then becomes how to handle this for platforms that offer limited backward compatibility (for example, the original DS and DS Lite models could play all GBA games, but this feature was discontinued with the DSi). Any thoughts? -- Wario Talk 19:01, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I think we should cover this information, but with BC being inconsistent, we would need some kind of clarification. I think the easiest solution is a template like ps5 in the infobox, which links to the  section on the relevant system's page, which can go into how BC is supported on that system. The infobox could look something like this:
 * |systems=PlayStation 2,
 * A related question would be purpose-built backwards compatibility like Super Game Boy, which allows you to play GB games on SNES. I think it supports everything that Game Boy supports, but some games have "special features", like special borders and colour schemes. Would these count as supported systems, or BC? -- Prod (talk) 19:42, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Still hoping to get more feedback on this one. -- Prod (talk) 00:22, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Now with syslist, perhaps we can have bclist? -- Prod (talk) 23:06, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking the best course of action is probably having a  parameter in the infobox with a bcsyslist template. This way we can modify the layout in the future (either show it with the systems, or as a separate row), and we can have more unique categorization options for each system. -- Prod (talk) 02:41, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I think splitting them to two groups is fine. I would not treat hardware extensions like SGB the same as I would say the Wii playing GCN games. Trig - 17:11, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

A topic that came up on discord yesterday was the situation where games were sold on new platforms, but using emulation. In particular the fact that without the category the main category is filled with irrelevant entries. My opinion is that it was a mistake to remove the category, it is needed to keep the main system category free of clutter.--Henke37 (talk) 17:53, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

This category should be split up into more specific categories. At least the following: Any others? -- Prod (talk) 17:29, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Local multiplayer
 * Local co-op
 * Local splitscreen multiplayer
 * Local hotseat multiplayer
 * Online multiplayer
 * Online co-op
 * MMO
 * Local splitscreen co-op, and maybe instead of "multiplayer" it should be "versus" or "PVP". Also it would be good to have a modelist template. -BrownDerby (talk) 19:21, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm still a bit concerned about the "co-op" term at all. It's really useful to know which games have a co-op mode, but a game has to have multiplayer in some form to allow it, so I'm not sure it exactly fits in with all the other options. Perhaps it should only be a single option that says "yes there is some form of multiplayer co-op".
 * Single player
 * Email multiplayer (Civilization)
 * Multiplayer (Contra)
 * Hot-seat multiplayer (Super Mario World)
 * Split-screen multiplayer (GoldenEye 007)
 * Online multiplayer
 * Massively multiplayer online
 * Co-op
 * -- Prod (talk) 20:24, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Going by this list, it looks like the "coop" designation is orthogonal to the rest. Coop describes the relationship between players, while the rest are how two players share the experience.--Henke37 (talk) 08:12, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Being orthogonal, we could either create categories for every intersection (with multiplayer, so 13 total) or keep it as a separate entry and people could search based on some kind of query (DPL or Cargo). I feel these 8 categories should be enough of a split for most purposes, or is it over-categorization already? -- Prod (talk) 22:51, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Delete all
As the various rd based templates are disappearing, nothing will be categorized by the days of the year. It makes sense to delete all the day sub-categories like. This leaves the redirects, like January 1. Simplest would be to delink and delete them all. Does anyone see any potential uses for these pages otherwise? -- Prod (talk) 00:09, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Honestly no, these categories rarely helped unless someone wanted to know what games were released on their birthday. I did wonder if a month/year category would be interesting, but probably only for people who religiously chronogame like I do, and I have other sources for that information.  I say let 'em go.   Pro  cyon  01:07, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with the end of days. I think keep things in months as the smallest is fine. As for day pages, with the exception of April 1st which may have inter-site function (and should exclusively be used for that), games should not have listed days as links. Trig - 17:11, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * If you mean Category:March, I feel that's unnecessary since it doesn't really serve a purpose. If you mean at the year-specific level, like Category:March 2023, I feel it gets back to the original problem of us having verified data on specific months. Users shouldn't come to us as a source for release dates, even at a monthly level, the primary use of dates, since none of it is verified. -- Prod (talk) 22:22, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Fully gut supporting unplayable games
It does not make sense that we host coverage of games that are no longer playable in any capacity. Many of these guides were not even well completed either. I would like to nominate the deletion of all to most existing unplayable titles, and implementing a policy that would remove game that have shut down or recently become unplayable otherwise to be deleted after 1 month of its closure. Trig - 17:11, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * We should absolutely keep the front pages. The games existed, and we should show that we know of their (one-time) existence. I can see validity to discussing purging all subpages, but some of these games do come back as abandonware. -- Prod (talk) 22:55, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * And if they do, the main page can be undeleted. Nonexistant/unplayable titles are for Wikipedia, not StrategyWiki. Trig - 02:29, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Virtual Console
A discussion was had recently in the Discord about Virtual Console. To be more clear, in a categorical sense, games that were purchasable via Nintendo's Virtual Console should not list the console purchased on a game's infobox. An example is Albert Odyssey (1993), which while playable via the Super Famicom and Satellaview, were also able to be downloaded on the Japanese Virtual Consoles for Wii and Wii U. These Virtual Console releases are simply emulation, so I believe a consensus should be reached on whether the modern consoles names are completely removed, kept on there, or if a new category for Virtual Consoles should be added. Auxillify (talk) 22:01, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Wii VC and similar were all removed since they're more like distributors than systems. You still play the game on your Wii system, though it is emulated (officially provided by the manufacturer, rather than 3rd party). There's a lot of systems that would need to be (re)created to re-categorize like this, and I'm not sure they're all as simple as running through an emulator.
 * Nintendo Switch Online + Expansion Pack
 * PlayStation Network
 * Xbox Live Arcade
 * Wii Virtual Console
 * Wii U Virtual Console
 * Nintendo 3DS Virtual Console
 * One idea brought up on discord was to handle these like the Super Game Boy. Categorize them, but don't list them in the infobox. They're similar to accessories to the base system that provide additional functionality (playing old games). -- Prod (talk) 23:14, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I think VC should be identified as a sales platform and not a system, similar to Steam. Steam isn't a system, it's a distribution point.  (To complicate matters more, we don't identify Steam games as belonging to the PC system, we say they're Windows and/or Linux games).  We used to have this distinction in the Infobox but then it went away.  I think it's a useful distinction, and I'd be in favor of bringing it back.  Yeah it can become a headache to maintain all of the sources where a game can come from, but that's the point of the wiki; it's a collaborative effort, and it can be achieved through enough users' efforts.  Pro  cyon  00:51, 24 March 2023 (UTC)