From StrategyWiki, the video game walkthrough and strategy guide wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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: ~~~~).


Blocked Message[edit]

What will the blocked message be for this wiki? Mpadilla0139 (talk) 23:09, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Better yet, why do you care? Procyon 02:18, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Ports, remasters, and re-releases[edit]

Currently, we have a few different ways re-releases and ports are handled. Some games have a Versions/Home version comparison page. Others have a separate main page. There's a lot of information, and I'd like to improve the organization, and reduce redundancy. As our general policy is one "game" should have one guide, even if it differs in name, graphics, or features, I feel we should consolidate all the distinct guides into a single one. I propose the following changes:

  1. Have sections in the {{Game}} infobox, one for each release/port, which can be collapsed to just the title. Each section would have 6 entries - title, developer, publisher, year, system, rating. Any most recent boxart (or some other metric) can go in the infobox, but other scans can go in a gallery below the {{Continue Nav}}. This would reduce the duplication of main pages without losing any information, and make it less likely for users to accidentally end up in a "different" guide with no way back to the main page.
  2. For minor differences in the versions, it can be listed on the guide main page. For more in-depth details, we can have a Versions page (move Home version comparison to Versions)

One major impact mentioned above, is the removal of release dates, reduced to just a year. As we generally don't include references on StrategyWiki, none of our dates can be trusted, which isn't useful as a historical reference. The only information it provides is approximately when the game was released, which is clear enough from just the year. This also removes country-specific release information. This will shrink ridiculously long infoboxes (some doubly so). -- Prod (talk) 08:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

The consolidated guides sounds fine but the infobox stuff I'm not sure. It would be good to see an example first. -BrownDerby (talk) 02:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Example updated. This has the original game, plus 1 remake, but it would be expandable to more. I'm not really sure what criteria we would use to distinguish between splitting sections or not. All the actual DK releases are essentially the same, and we could only include the year the first one was released, and list all the systems under a single section. Re-releases (new developer/publisher) would definitely get their own section though. The /Versions page has a lot of the details on the specific versions. -- Prod (talk) 03:39, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Condensing things and eliminating redundancies has my complete approval. I managed to condense all the computers and NES guides for Ultima III: Exodus into one, despite the differences. I am preparing to do the same for Drakkhen (hard-mode computers vs. easy-mode SNES) and Eggerland 2/Eggerland. Still, I am afraid that sometimes a remake is too different to be put in the same guide. For example, the SNES remake of Ultima VII: The Black Gate belongs even to a different genre! --Abacos (talk) 20:59, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't get why release dates need to be removed when nothing else has references either. Is there really much of an advantage to using sectioned infoboxes as opposed to a single infobox with sectioned cells? I'm all for consolidated guides for rereleases that are fundamentally the same, but I guess remakes that are significantly different from the original, like say, Double Dragon (NES), Ninja Gaiden (NES), Final Fantasy VII Remake, the Trials of Mana remake, Senran Kagura Burst Re:Newal, or Hyperdimension Neptunia Re;Birth 1, would still need to have their own separate guides. Wanderer (talk) 04:56, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

If our dates are off by a day or two and no one is bothered, why even have the day? It's easy to vandalize a release date by a day or two and without references, we'd have to go searching for other sites to get the real information. If someone needs the information, they'd go somewhere with references. Release dates take up far more space in the infobox/front page than they deserve for such unreliable information. All other information has direct impacts to gameplay (publisher is debatable), but the specific release day does not.
If the game needs a different guide, it's effectively a different game, not a port or re-release, so there would be no concerns on the games you and Abacos mentioned. They'd stay separate. -- Prod (talk) 05:35, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

If the goal is just to make the infobox shorter, there are other things you could do:

  • make the left column slimmer
  • shorter or abbreviated names in sys header (eg "Nintendo Switch" to "Switch", "PlayStation 5" to "PS5")
  • change dates to yyyy-mm-dd (2021-02-16)
  • style="display:block; border:none; max-height:250px; overflow-y:auto" for release date cell
  • change ratings so it's just a row of icons
  • change partner links to a row of icons
  • smaller font

-BrownDerby (talk) 08:40, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

The main goal is to reduce unnecessary information. There are 3 tweaks in your list to shrink/hide portions of the release dates; I'd rather just get rid of them (down to just the year). Ratings update is on my to-do list. I'm not a big fan of just icons for partner links, but it's a good point to consider. -- Prod (talk) 17:13, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
We could also move all the release dates to Wikidata. They have many more people who would be willing and able to validate release dates. -- Prod (talk) 02:17, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm fine with consolidating ports with minor differences, but I would prefer separate main pages for enhanced ports/re-releases with additional content. The different versions can share the table of contents where it makes sense to reduce any redundancies in the walkthrough. The relevant infobox data can be moved to the separate pages, which would help shorten the infoboxes. Tedium (talk) 11:29, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

A problem I've been trying to solve is if someone visits one of those "enhanced ports" and then clicks a link in the ToC, it's not clear how the user can get back to the main page they were on. By having the information on the guide's main page, and all the enhancement information either on the main guide page or the /Versions page, it's much easier to find the information. -- Prod (talk) 17:13, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Some examples of games that would have a shared main guide page, with multiple entries:

The main concern this brings up for me, is that we would still need to categorize the correct names. However, with this updated infobox, it could probably be accomplished by a bot. -- Prod (talk) 16:49, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Another point someone brought up is related to ports with different names. Super Mario 64 vs Super Mario 64 DS. People would search for those individually, so it's probably a good idea to keep separate main pages for each. This would need to be restricted to versions where people are likely to search for the base name, and not the "new" names, even though it'll be listed on the page. -- Prod (talk) 02:47, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Template updated[edit]

Module:Game has been updated. You can see a migration example on Gears of War and Halo 2. -- Prod (talk) 19:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

This is really impressive Prod. Nice job. Procyon 02:28, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

As this change would remove the release date information, I'd actually like to move this content over to wikidata:. If there's no concerns, I can start working on a bot to do this migration. Unfortunately, the content may be too complex to automate, so it may only be possible for our more basic guides. -- Prod (talk) 19:51, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

A more in-depth example is Ace Combat: Assault Horizon and Enhanced Edition. I redirected Enhanced Edition back to the main release with appropriate categories, and deleted the ToC page. I also listed out all the different releases, and added a Versions section to go into more details. -- Prod (talk) 02:17, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Main page reorg[edit]

Main guide page mockup

To give an idea of what my goal is, here's a quick mockup of how I think things should be arranged. -- Prod (talk) 03:30, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

One of my concerns with this setup, is that we have a lot of repetition of links near the top. The Header Nav and Continue Nav both lave links to the Walkthrough page. There's also a ToC link already, why would anyone use the "jump to toc" link? Perhaps the Header Nav should link to the one on the same page if it's used on the main page or /Walkthrough pages, and then we re-purpose the Continue Nav space for something else? -- Prod (talk) 04:35, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey[edit]

Hey, is there an image archive of all the images uploaded to StrategyWiki? I'm currently looking for a specific image to go in a page I'm editing, and can't find it. 84.65.52.125 13:13, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Strategywiki, o anonymous contributor! All images are labeled with one or more categories. Here you can find 459 images about the guide you are editing: Category:Pokémon_Ruby_and_Sapphire_images -- Abacos (talk) 22:10, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks fke the link! Unfortunately, I couldn't find the exact image I was looking for (if you're wondering, it's an image of the female rival sprite in Pokémon Ruby and Sapphire). Guess I'll wait to get a computer to upload it myself since I'm on mobile right now (or until some other user uploads it, whichever comes first) 84.65.52.125 14:32, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Header Nav num parameter[edit]

I feel having the num parameter in the {{Header Nav}} doesn't really make sense. I suggest we move it to the {{Game}} infobox or even to its own template. I think having it as part of the infobox template makes the most sense, since it defines the guide page, but it doesn't have to be displayed in the table itself. -- Prod (talk) 05:49, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

I see your point, but at the same time, it is an optional parameter, and I'm afraid it would be confusing if one template's parameters controlled the behavior of the display of another. Procyon 02:37, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
MediaWiki has a feature called mw:Help:Page status indicators. We use them for {{featured}}. I have updated them to show up in the first heading instead of getting stuffed in the corner of the page content. I have also updated {{Header Bar}} to show the cs as an indicator as a demo. The goal would be to move this feature out of the header template into {{Game}}, and not show it in the nav at all. -- Prod (talk) 04:46, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Yokai Douchuuki[edit]

As the original creator of the guide for Namco's first 16-bit game, I am delighted to see that it has finally been returned to its original Japanese title after almost a decade (on the pretext that its English name came from a bootleg board, which was not known back in 2011); however, I feel I have to point out that when BubbleRevolution moved it on Friday, he romanised the title as "Yokai Dochuuki", and as its third Kanji character reads as (道), which is romanised as dou without the macron, the second word should be romanised as "Douchuuki" (I would also move it myself, but do not wish to get into trouble for doing so). Namcorules (talk) 08:30, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Mega Man ZX[edit]

Mega Man ZX has always been considered its own series, not part of the Mega Man Zero series. It may have some similar gameplay mechanics and a similar art style, but it has a different setting, time period, premise, and cast of characters. It's intended as a spinoff series. The fact that the two series got a shared collection doesn't make them the same series. The Mega Man ZX games should be split back into their own series.Wanderer (talk) 06:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Having too many categories makes it more difficult for users to navigate around and find the specific series/category they're looking for. I don't remember where it's documented, but the two main rules are that we avoid deep nesting of series (Mega Man -> X -> Zero -> ZX), and a child series should have at least 3 games before it can have a series cat/template on its own. I'm open to suggestions on a better organization, but ZX having only 2 games makes it a pretty "minor" series. One possibility would be putting X/Zero/ZX all in one category, but I'm not sure if that would be overloading it. @Abacos (talk · contribs) also worked on filling in some of the category pages, so maybe you have some input as well? -- Prod (talk) 23:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Bayonetta has only two games and we don't count it as part of the Devil May Cry series. Wanderer (talk) 08:05, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Different developers/publishers, and it's unclear if their stories are in the same universe. WP also says there's a 3rd game coming out soon. They have a lot of similarities due to shared director (designer?), but they still seem to fall under separate series. -- Prod (talk) 17:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Prod, but I also have another reason. If you only have two related games, the "preceded by"/"followed by" cells in the infobox are all you need to display all (both) the related games, and a series template becomes redundant. --Abacos (talk) 20:51, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Page statistics[edit]

Is there a way to get page statistics? Tom Haws (talk) 22:45, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

What kind of statistics? -- Prod (talk) 22:58, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Well, I am interested in visitor counts by various measures to budget my efforts. Tom Haws (talk) 05:41, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately, with the caching, we don't have precise measurements of page views in the site itself. However, I can check our google analytics if you have some specific questions. Please leave a message on my talk page with what specific questions you have, or find me on discord. -- Prod (talk) 17:18, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Getting Started -> Gameplay[edit]

Our term of Getting Started has been used for a while. We had "How to Play" in use as well, but that doesn't really match our page naming structure. Getting Started has always been a catch-all phrase to cover all guides, but it's just been 'good enough'. I'm proposing we rename all Getting Started pages to Gameplay.

  • It's a much clearer heading for the sections that go below it.
  • It's much more likely as a web search term.
  • It's only one word so no more inconsistency with sentence case vs title case.

As a secondary point, I'd like to make this page mandatory.

  • Controls would go on the Gameplay page if they don't deserve their own page.
  • Continue Nav would link to Gameplay without checking for a Controls link (can still override).
  • We add a link to Gameplay to the {{Header Nav}}.

I feel this would overall help make our content easier to find from search engines and once people are in the guides. -- Prod (talk) 19:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

This is also related to #Main page reorg and possibly getting rid of the Continue Nav completely. -- Prod (talk) 04:36, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
The name change feels like it might cause overlap with that and walkthrough (especially where it's already split across multiple pages, with a blank main walkthrough page). In general, the first page should be on how to get into the game, while the specific gameplay mechanics would appear in the latter. --Sigma 7 (talk) 04:26, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, this one is tricky. I see Sigma's point about the potential confusion with Walkthrough. Going back to the intent, or the purpose of the page, it's supposed to break down the rules and basic knowledge one needs to play the game. Whereas the walkthrough is how you apply that knowledge in order to beat the game. That's why I initially used "How to Play" as the title, and settled on "Getting Started" because it really is the point in the guide that you're supposed to start with. It would be hard to understand when a Walkthrough tells you to, say, double jump if you haven't read the Getting Started page to learn how to double jump, or even that double jumping it a thing you can do. So it's an introduction to the rules of the game. The title "Gameplay" kinda captures that, but it's actually a more ambiguous term; it could really mean anything. So I'm not sure if it's a strong candidate for the title of that page. Procyon 00:47, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
The main reason is that "Gameplay" is a much better search term than "Getting Started". As you say, it's a heading for how the game works, while the Walkthrough sections are for actually getting through the sections based on the Gameplay. Installing/inserting coins should be assumed knowledge, though the menu system is a valid topic. -- Prod (talk) 00:56, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

There are 2606 ToC pages that link to a non-existent Getting Started page, which would be easy to migrate via Special:ReplaceText. There are 1566 guides with Getting Started pages (some of which could be complex migrations), of which the following 19 guides have Getting Started and Gameplay pages already:

  1. Counter-Strike: Condition Zero/Gameplay
  2. Counter-Strike: Source/Gameplay strategies
  3. Counter-Strike/Gameplay strategies
  4. Disney's Toontown Online/Gameplay
  5. Dota 2/Gameplay Mechanics
  6. Dragon Warrior IV/Gameplay Basics
  7. Gunbound/Gameplay Mechanics
  8. Lineage II/Gameplay Guides
  9. Lineage II/Gameplay Guides/Group Guide 1
  10. Lineage II/Gameplay Guides/Solo Guide 1
  11. Sakura Wars: So Long, My Love/Gameplay
  12. Smuggler's Run 2: Hostile Territory/Gameplay
  13. Unreal Tournament 3/Gameplay
  14. Viewtiful Joe/Gameplay
  15. Final Fantasy II/Gameplay
  16. Final Fantasy/Gameplay
  17. Siren/Gameplay
  18. The Dog Island/Gameplay
  19. Zillion/Gameplay

-- Prod (talk) 00:20, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

All guides that had a non-existent "Getting Started" page linked from the ToC have been updated to link to "Gameplay". All featured guides have also been migrated to the new structure. A number of guides didn't have either a "Getting Started" or "Gameplay" page linked. I've updated most of them, but there are still 40 guides that are at cs3/4 without a good option to move into place (listed below). If anyone is familiar with these games, please update them. This leaves 1,518 guides with GS pages that need to be renamed, and 11 guides that have both Gameplay and GS pages that will need some rearranging. {{Continue Nav}} has been updated to prioritize the Gameplay page over the GS page. -- Prod (talk) 04:05, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

{{Series Nav}}[edit]

Following on some initial work by Wanderer (talk · contribs) and discussed in 2016, I've made some updates to {{Series Nav}}. You can see an example of the new format in {{BattleTech}}. It's less html-heavy but more wiki-syntax heavy. Should we migrate, or stick to the current format? -- Prod (talk) 23:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

With the current "half-way" implementation, the layout is looking pretty bad for some migrated templates. It would be better to stick to one method or the other so the CSS can be cleaned up. Does anyone have a preference? -- Prod (talk) 16:20, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Backward compatibility[edit]

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? --WarioTalk 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 {{bc|ps5}} in the infobox, which links to the #Backwards compatibility 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]], {{bc|ps3}}
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)