User talk:Abacos


 * User talk:Abacos/Archive: 2012-2017

Bionic Commando
This seems to suggest that this should be split into two different series: Wolf of the Battlefield and Bionic Commando. What do you think? -- Prod (talk) 21:23, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The gameplay of "Commando/Wolf of the Battlefield" (and its sequels) is fully incorporated in the "Bionic Commando" games, as a mini-game or special bonus stages. It is the same as when Mario Bros. was incorporated into Super Mario Bros. 3 (and in a different way in Super Mario All-Stars). Since Mario Bros. and Super Mario Bros. are in the same series, then I would also keep Commando together with Bionic Commando. ---Abacos (talk) 11:51, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Mega Man III/
Was this an actual release? I couldn't find anything after a quick google. -- Prod (talk) 17:43, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Simply put, whenever I select "https://strategywiki.org/wiki/Mega_Man_III" in the address bar, my browser changes it to "https://strategywiki.org/wiki/Mega_Man_III/", and I get to an error page, therefore I created the redirect back to the actual page. It does it with plenty of Strategywiki pages. --Abacos (talk) 17:50, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * This sounds like an issue with your browser, since the trailing / is considered a different address than without, and as such has different content. This should _definitely_ not be in the Mega Man category. Although I like having redirects for possible misspellings of names, I'd rather this issue be fixed globally rather than relying on redirects. -- Prod (talk) 17:58, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Just before reading your answer, I thought that maybe it could be fixed globally. I wonder why it came to my mind only now. Therefore, I will look for all the similar redirect pages I created, and delete them all. --Abacos (talk) 18:21, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Which browser/version are you using? And any extensions? -- Prod (talk) 18:55, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The latest Mozilla Firefox, without any extension. --Abacos (talk) 22:40, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * That's strange. I've been using the same for years and never seen that happen. -- Prod (talk) 02:52, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Well then, I will use more patience: if I have to delete the trailing slash twice or more times, I will do it. --Abacos (talk) 12:32, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * If you're seeing it, there may be others having the same issue. Can you try starting firefox in safe mode and see if you can reproduce the issue? -- Prod (talk) 19:04, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Mega Man Bosses
One of the discussions we had a while ago was to not put the bosses in weakness order, but to try and follow the display order. Weaknesses would be considered a spoiler so it shouldn't be displayed in the ToC. -- Prod (talk) 14:45, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I agree with this. The information should be contained in the guide, but presented in such a way that readers only discover it if they actively choose to find out what the weaknesses are, not simply by looking at the table of contents.  Spoiler-free is difficult to do, and takes a greater deal of planning and organizing, but it gives each guide a higher level of quality in the end.   Pro  cyon  14:52, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I see. I am fine with that. If I knew it, I would have respected it. I can fix it. How about sorted by serial number, i.e. as they are presented during the ending credits? --Abacos (talk) 23:26, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Stats
Hey Abacos. I don't mind the switch to attribute, but I just want you to understand that the word "stat" is a generally accepted term, at least within the context of games (video or otherwise). Stat is another word for attribute, while statistic is piece of data from a study, and not an aspect about a character. I was using both stat and attribute to reduce word fatigue. I personally don't like reading a page where the same word is used over and over again when alternatives are available, but that's just me.  Pro cyon  01:40, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, this week I was stressed out for other reasons. You are right: repeated use of the same word is bad writing style. I have to think of "stat" not as an abbreviation (you know, I dislike abbreviations), but as a synthesis/intersection of "status" and "statistic", until I persuade myself. :D --Abacos (talk) 17:49, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Template:Forgotten Realms
If these games were all done by different developers, shouldn't they be separate series? Usually different developers change enough of the game that they're not really a series anymore. -- Prod (talk) 20:40, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Forgotten Realms is a license, like Star Wars, or Harry Potter. The license gets shopped around to different developers, but the category serves to archive every game that belongs to the license.  Maybe it could be further subcategorized. --  Pro  cyon  01:25, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I think it is unnecessary to create further sub-categories for the following reasons:


 * 1) Almost all the games (except e.g. the strategy games) use the same rules from Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, and they share the same setting, character classes, enemies, etc.
 * 2) I personally would prefer to avoid templates made 100% of red links to nonexisting pages.
 * 3) Pool of Radiance and the Gold Box games are the very first role-playing games based on Dungeons & Dragons. I think it would be unfair to put them in a 3rd level sub-sub-series. Chronologically, they are the original series.
 * 4) The plots of the Stormfront games are unrelated (except for the Savage Frontier's), and the gameplay of the last ones is different.
 * 5) The gameplays of the Dreamforge games are totally different: one is a random-generated dungeon crawler, the other one is a plot-rich open world.
 * 6) I occasionally pondered the possibility of moving Black Isle's Icewind Dale games into the  series: they use the same engine of Baldur's Gate 1 & 2, and Black Isle developed Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance 2. Still, I am against creating a separate "Icewind Dale" category.
 * After all, maybe the previous version of the template, organized by genre, was better than the current. ---Abacos (talk) 07:14, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Template:Dungeons & Dragons
I found a few inconsistencies in the D&D templates: -- Prod (talk) 07:33, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Dungeons & Dragons Tactics is listed in both Dungeons & Dragons (strategy) and Dungeons & Dragons
 * Is a subseries of  or ?
 * Are &  subseries' of  or ?

-- Abacos (talk) 09:29, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I grouped the Dungeons & Dragons games by setting. The Dungeons & Dragons (strategy) is an exception, because I think that players prefer a genre over a setting: therefore, that template groups (duplicates) all tactical/strategic Dungeons & Dragons games from all different settings/categories/templates. My idea would be to have the D&D Strategy template alone, without a D&D Strategy category. We may substitute the D&D Strategy template with a "Similar games" section in the guides, if you prefer.
 * Eye of the Beholder is sort of a crossover: it is a clone of Dungeon Master (same identical gameplay) with the setting of AD&D Forgotten Realms. Players who loved the Dungeon Master series will love its clone, too; players who loved other Forgotten Realms games might or might not love Eye of the Beholder (in particular, I like open-world role-playing games, but dungeon crawls are boring to me).
 * Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter Nights are subseries of Forgotten Realms, therefore sub-subseries of Dungeons & Dragons.

Gallery
Is there a reason you used tables instead of the tags on Category:ActRaiser? Also, do consider joining us on discord (link in the left bar). -- Prod (talk) 19:30, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I used tables because I thought that the gallery images were too small to be appreciated. It is my personal preference, though. I can replace it with a and press "Ctrl++". Now that you mention it, I think that the tag could benefit of a "slideshow function" as on wikia.com. There, you click on an image, and a sort of slideshow opens, so you can just browse through big images by clicking left or right.
 * Discord? First time I hear about it. Is it for video calls? I prefer writing and reading: I can write without foreign accent, I can read pretending everybody has "English of England" accent (except for User:Moydow, who is Irish, and I lived there).
 * I asked Google and Wikipedia about Discord: I will give it a try tomorrow. --Abacos (talk) 21:57, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * A few points:
 * There's a preference to set default thumbnail size you can update for yourself. People can customize that as they like.
 * There's a firefox extension called Imagus that will zoom for you. There may be something similar on chrome.
 * The random/inconsistent sizes of the images looks pretty bad to me.
 * There's a few fancy mw:Help:Images if you really want to, but those don't match the consistency of the site right now.
 * Discord is primarily for text chat (+ images/gifs), though voice is available if desired. I'm often online and available to chat. -- Prod (talk) 22:51, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Wow! You listed more options for the gallery that I could imagine. Thank you! --Abacos (talk) 13:36, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I saw you join discord for a few minutes the other day, but you disconnected before I had a chance to message you. I've set up a page in the guide about it. -- Prod (talk) 00:26, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Template:Details
Details may be useful to you. -- Prod (talk) 16:01, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * It is interesting, indeed, and I will keep it in mind. On the other hand, all the links I make between Ultima 4 and its NES remake are to allow readers/player to make a comparison between them. They add no information on the topic. I started by making a single walkthrough (as I could do for Ultima 3), but then I realized that every single section had a subsection starting with "In the NES port, instead,..." I reached the conclusion that the NES version is different enough to be considered a remake. --Abacos (talk) 16:41, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Usually we use sidebars to show differences between version (Super Mario 64 DS). I wouldn't worry about linking every page like that. Maybe consider if they can share a ToC? -- Prod (talk) 20:35, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

I know, but in this case the sidebars would be almost as big as the original sections. In fact, in the NES remake, many clues are learned in different towns, many items are found in different locations, some dungeon floors are different, some sub-quests were removed and new ones were introduced. I purposedly made the two tables of contents identical, and the two guides do share all the appendices. --Abacos (talk) 03:44, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Descent
I disagree with merging Descent and Freespace, the games are significantly different and don't even belong to the same universe. -- Prod (talk) 15:35, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * O.K. I merged them because I saw they shared the same series template. After gathering further information, I agree with you. Shall we create two separate series templates? --Abacos (talk) 08:49, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Mystery Dungeon
What is Torneko no Daibōken: Fushigi no Dungeon It's linked as the first game in the series. wp:Template:Mystery Dungeon series also treats it as a sub series. -- Prod (talk) 21:43, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that the ' series started as a spin-off from ', but the second game already featured original characters and setting (Mystery Dungeon: Shiren the Wanderer). If  is beyond any doubt a sub-series of Dragon Quest, it feels wrong (to me) to consider Shiren the Wanderer and as a sub-sub-series of Dragon Quest. What do you think about it?

🇨🇴 I personally like this organization, simple and compact: 🇨🇴 This would be the alternative, but I think it would be too much stratified and difficult to navigate.

Furthermore, the "Mystery Dungeon" category & template would only include crossovers and sub-series. 🇨🇴 --Abacos (talk) 22:15, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Looking specifically at option 2, why is Mystery Dungeon a sub-series of DQ MD? Why not this?

🇨🇴 On a second thought, I would rather organize it this way:


 * 1) Dragon Quest is the parent series.
 * 2) The first Mystery Dungeon game is a Dragon Quest Mystery Dungeon game.
 * 3) The second Mystery Dungeon game is a Shiren the Wanderer game, that is an original character exclusive to the Mystery Dungeon series, but completely unrelated to Dragon Quest.
 * 4) Several Mystery Dungeon crossovers followed, five standalone ones and two crossover-series: Pokémon Mystery Dungeon and Chocobo's Mystery Dungeon.

--Abacos (talk) 07:34, 28 May 2018 (UTC) 🇨🇴 🇨🇴 We could also include both Shiren the Wanderer and Dragon Quest Mystery Dungeon in the Mystery Dungeon category. --Abacos (talk) 08:37, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I think overall this is fine, but I feel Shiren should get it own subseries. It doesn't really follow the same story, and there's 9 games to it. -- Prod (talk) 18:58, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

I agree. The statement that persuaded me: "there's 9 games to it". --Abacos (talk) 11:11, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I had a feeling it would :). Is The Nightmare of Druaga: Fushigi no Dungeon just a different romanization, or was it a separate release? It probably doesn't need to be in the category. -- Prod (talk) 14:05, 29 May 2018 (UTC)


 * It is just a different romanization. I always see the Japanese preposition "no" (Eng: "of") romanized as a separate word, but in this case the official localized title leaves it attached to the word as a suffix. Remembering Procyon's statement, I created a redirect. --Abacos (talk) 14:25, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirects for separate romanizations are fine, but only one of them should be categorized. -- Prod (talk) 22:39, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Discord
I see three users with the name Abacos on the server now. Seems you've joined with 3 separate email addresses? -- Prod (talk) 18:16, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * No, every time I try and enter, it asks to confirm, so I give my email address (always the same), and it replies that it is already used (of course, it is used by me since the previous time I tried to log in), and I cannot login. Abacos (talk) 15:34, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Did you try looking around to see if there's an option for if you already have an account? IIRC the more prominent option is to enter a name for a new account so that confused me into making another account one time (I wasn't even aware I was making one lol). -- Wario Talk 21:10, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Castlevania
I saw this change and it seems to rearrange things significantly from what the "story order" had. I've been thinking of what the main goal of our series templates should be. It could either be to show story, release order, or genre. Generally, those all match, but sometimes prequels/sequels/etc get released in different formats which make things more complicated. -- Prod (talk) 14:39, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I usually choose to organize by genre (e.g. Template:Mega Man). If a series includes games belonging to different genres, I think a player is more likely to play only those whose genre he/she likes. If you loved Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, you are willing for more of the same; the old template showed it next to Castlevania: Rondo of Blood, but it has completely different gameplay: if you were looking for another Symphony, you would be sorely disappointed. --Abacos (talk) 15:57, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
 * All sorting methods I mentioned can be justified one way or the other. The question is which should we standardize on the site. Series categories should cover all the information for users to find what they're looking for (search by developer, genre, age, story, system, etc.). But which is most appropriate for the series pages.  The fact that you had to change the template so significantly suggests that these don't all line up nicely for the more complicated series'. -- Prod (talk) 19:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Abacos, I gotta agree with Prod on this one. For one thing, our templates are modeled after Wikipedia, and I'm inclined to want to stick with that because that's what people are accustomed to.  Splitting them up by genre is not intuitive to the average reader.  I believe most people will look at what you've done and find it confusing.  The only reason it kind of works for Mega Man, is because sub-series tend to stick to similar genres (e.g. all Mega Man Network games are RPGs, etc.)  So I would argue that the Castlevania template should be restored to a more series-centric arrangement.   Pro  cyon  02:12, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Ok. It was an experiment. Can I keep a presentation by genre in the category page? (I wrote it already, I will publish it, if you disagree, it can be easily undone). It could serve as a basis for a "similar games" section that can be added in the "getting started" page of the individual guides. --Abacos (talk) 07:40, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The series category pages are pretty open to interpretation. I think the genre content is pretty interesting. -- Prod (talk) 13:00, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Willow naming
Hi Abacos. Just wanted to let you know that I renamed the Willow guides. Your naming wasn't really inline with our naming conventions. Typically, the first game to go by a title gets the guide. So in this case, the mini-game version (1988) came out before the other two (1989), so it gets the name "Willow" with some disambiguation information posted at the top. The other two are then named with some other identifier. In this case since they were exclusive to one platform (NES and Arcade), that's what I used. If, say, the NES one came out the same year on another system, I might have used the year instead, but since that wasn't the case, this was a pretty easy choice. I moved the guides and their subpages around, but I didn't bother moving either image category for now cuz that's kind of a pain. Let me know if you have any questions.  Pro cyon  03:17, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok. I will adjust the rest of the names and hyperlinks. :) --Abacos (talk) 10:22, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Everything fixed. Sorry for having forgotten about the naming conventions. --Abacos (talk) 11:30, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Tower of Doom
Hello, Abacos -- what's your source for crediting Tower of Doom to Tom Loughry? The old Blue Sky Rangers pages credit the game to Dan Bass and John Tomlinson: Silverspell (talk) 02:04, 12 May 2019 (UTC) Hmmm, but that source seems to contradict the idea that Tom Loughry had anything to do with Tower of Doom, doesn't it? From the CRPG Addict's review, we have:
 * I read it in the blog of the Computer Role-Playing Games Addict. --Abacos (talk) 20:26, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

"[Loughry] planned to offer such features in a third Advanced Dungeons & Dragons title, but the project died during development. (He says it would have been "kind of like Zelda.") Later, other Mattel developers began working on a third AD&D game, but they lost the license in the meantime, so the game was ultimately published as Tower of Doom (1987) without the AD&D connection."

(Emphasis mine.) To me, that certainly indicates that Loughry didn't work on Tower of Doom (which isn't anything like Zelda), in accordance with the Blue Sky Rangers pages that attribute it to Bass and Tomlinson.Silverspell (talk) 20:55, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes, you are right. I misread.--Abacos (talk) 21:15, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your gracious reply and quick action! Silverspell (talk) 21:29, 14 May 2019 (UTC)