Tech, emailconfirmed, Administrators
81,877
edits
More actions
Forum:Temporary forums/Legacy validity (view source)
Revision as of 01:25, 7 March 2023
, 7 March 2023→Discussion
Tag: 2017 source edit |
Tag: 2017 source edit |
||
| Line 131: | Line 131: | ||
: [[User:Schreibenheimer]]: thanks for raising these point about our current practice on video games. Yes, I guess the idea is that this spearheads a shift in the way we cover games on this wiki. I didn't elaborate it ''too much'' on the OP itself because well... it was getting big enough as it is (but that is mostly what I meant whenever I brought up that "gameplay and narrative can and should be split, because that's how the game was designed". | : [[User:Schreibenheimer]]: thanks for raising these point about our current practice on video games. Yes, I guess the idea is that this spearheads a shift in the way we cover games on this wiki. I didn't elaborate it ''too much'' on the OP itself because well... it was getting big enough as it is (but that is mostly what I meant whenever I brought up that "gameplay and narrative can and should be split, because that's how the game was designed". | ||
: I suppose this also answers your point on, say, rare drops and Cinder only being achievable outside the main story: both of these are teambuilding, and therefore fall into the ''gameplay'' aspects. On [[Cinder]], we'd only mention the events of ''[[Bigger on the Inside (video game)|Bigger on the Inside]]'', because that's where she appears on ''cutscenes''; the majority of ''Legacy'' itself wouldn't be mentioned, except perhaps for giving context to ''BotI'' itself (in a similar way that we'd mention [[the Flux]] on [[Fugitive Doctor]] while discussing ''[[Once, Upon Time (TV story)|Once, Upon Time]]'': it contextualizes the adventure, even if she wasn't there for the main part of the event). | : I suppose this also answers your point on, say, rare drops and Cinder only being achievable outside the main story: both of these are teambuilding, and therefore fall into the ''gameplay'' aspects. On [[Cinder]], we'd only mention the events of ''[[Bigger on the Inside (video game)|Bigger on the Inside]]'', because that's where she appears on ''cutscenes''; the majority of ''Legacy'' itself wouldn't be mentioned, except perhaps for giving context to ''BotI'' itself (in a similar way that we'd mention [[the Flux]] on [[Fugitive Doctor]] while discussing ''[[Once, Upon Time (TV story)|Once, Upon Time]]'': it contextualizes the adventure, even if she wasn't there for the main part of the event). | ||
: Also, regards of "''when'' some of the side stories take place within the main story" ''are'' important, but not for '''whether''' we validate the story or not. There are dozens upon dozens of valid stories without clear placements in a character's chronology (hell, there are several stories that ''don't'' logically fit anywhere in said character's chronology. | : Also, regards of "''when'' some of the side stories take place within the main story" ''are'' important, but not for '''whether''' we validate the story or not. There are dozens upon dozens of valid stories without clear placements in a character's chronology (hell, there are several stories that ''don't'' logically fit anywhere in said character's chronology. | ||
: All of which to say: yes, validating ''Legacy'' would force us to reflect on how we cover video games in general, and it's about time we did so, imo. [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:20, 7 March 2023 (UTC) | : All of which to say: yes, validating ''Legacy'' would force us to reflect on how we cover video games in general, and it's about time we did so, imo. [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:20, 7 March 2023 (UTC) | ||
:: Adding a ps, this time towards [[User:Najawin]] (and I say this not as an admin per-se, but as a genuine sentiment): look, I know it's disappointing we don't have the Lost Forums to do research/counterargument, and I would '''love''' if they were available for us to do so. But that's the key work: '''if'''. We have been without them for over two years now, and their return is not a matter of "when", but of "if". I'm aware this is the first step in a potentially Big Change on the Wiki, and it's scary to do so without being able to compare and contrast with our present/past. But ''that's what these Temporary Forums were designed for''. If we can't make changes because we're holding on to the past OR to hopes that they will return.... we're doomed to stay stagnated. | |||
:: Now, of course, you have full rights to oppose this and any other threads you desire on this grounds, but you do see the perspective of most other people who are less... reluctant, I'd say? to ''absolutely'' wait to see ''if'' we'll ever get them back? Anyway, back to ''Legacy'' discussion. [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:25, 7 March 2023 (UTC) | |||