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)