Talk:Dalek Attack (video game)

Validity?

Based on Thread:161867, shouldn't this game be ruled invalid? Shambala108 ☎ 03:57, May 22, 2019 (UTC)

To be more specific, the page states:

• Player 1 could choose from a selection of the Second Doctor, Fourth Doctor and Seventh Doctor and were all "armed" with a sonic screwdriver, each representing a decade of the show. (DWM 197) Certain game port only have the Seventh Doctor.
• Player 2 could choose from Ace or the Brigadier.

Given that Legacy (video game) was ruled invalid for specifically that kind of reasoning, I can't see how this game could be considered valid. Shambala108 ☎ 04:00, May 22, 2019 (UTC)

This would best be discussed in an inclusion debate, no? But for my money, the difference with Legacy is that it's the Seventh Doctor and Ace who are featured in the cutscenes, no matter what the player chooses. Thus, in the vocabulary of video game storytelling, it's clear that it's "meant" to be Seven and Ace, and the possibility of using other Doctors or companions is a "bonus" not affecting the storytelling. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 10:44, October 20, 2019 (UTC)

Thing is, there isn't really any discussion to be had. It's long been established that video games where different characters can be used are not valid, for the same reasoning stage plays and Decide Your Destiny books are not valid: there isn't a single narrative that is shared by all. And we don't separate cut scenes from gameplay when considering the story. So by that existing policy, this story is invalid. Shambala108 ☎ 22:52, October 23, 2019 (UTC)

There obviously is a discussion; we're having it right now (which is in fact highly irregular). The policy isn't that "video games where different characters can be used" in the abstract are invalid, or else there's something missing at T:VS.

The policy is that stories with branching or optional narratives aren't valid. Most video games where you can pick different characters during the gameplay have this affect the narrative, but this isn't the case with this one, where the story remains the same no matter what icon the player chooses to use. So that rule-of-thumb application of policy oughtn't apply here. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 22:59, October 23, 2019 (UTC)

What's more, as common practice goes, this page has been existedfor ten years, and been edited by numerous admin during that time, including User:CzechOut and User:Tangerinduel. None of whom questioned its validity.

The way the page is worded right now is just about right: as the lead states, this is a Seventh Doctor and Ace story. It is a purely anecdotal bit of RL trivia that the player can choose to replace the player icons with other Doctors or companions, and has no bearing on the narrative, as shown by the fact that the cutscenes still use McCoy even when one picks another Doctor. The in-universe narrative (which is what we're worried about the changeability of) always remains the same. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 23:20, October 23, 2019 (UTC)

As much as I personally disagree with the ruling of the Legacy thread, the precedent it creates does favour invalidity for Dalek Attack (given the information provided on here and the game's page). Legacy's narrative also doesn't change regardless of which characters the player chooses, but the final ruling was that the game was invalid because the gameplay allows for multiple narratives, even if the storyline remais unchanged. OncomingStorm12th ☎ 00:14, October 24, 2019 (UTC)

I beg to disagree. The pretty strong difference is that while the story is the same either way, Legacy doesn't tell you within this story what Doctor and companion are actually living through these events. It treats all the possible choices as equally possible. So yes, multiple narratives of a sort.

Whereas Dalek Attack tells you it's a Seventh Doctor/Ace story from the get-go and never lets go of that. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 00:19, October 24, 2019 (UTC)

For the discussion's sake, I'll let be known here that I haven't played Dalek Attack, so I don't know how deeply the connection can trully be made, but no, the storyline of Legacy doesn't change: it's just the fact that all those characters are meant to be together at once. So, for example, no matter how many times you play the level Robot of Sherwood: Gold, and no matter which Doctor/companions you use, it will always be the Eighth Doctor who comes into the intro cutscene and says "Looks like we've wandered into some altercation.", and it will always be the Seventh Doctor who follows up with "I see the guy in the outfit, but who is he fighting over there in the shadows?", to which the Sheriff of Nottingham will always reply: "So, you've brought reinforcements? Nothing I can't deal with!".

Now, isn't that the scenario we have with Dalek Attack: you may choose to play with the Second Doctor, but still it will be the Seventh who will appear to say the lines? OncomingStorm12th ☎ 00:34, October 24, 2019 (UTC)

Not quite. I had underestimated the similarity between Legacy and Dalek Attack, but there's still a difference: you speak of "the fact that all those characters are meant to be together at once" in Legacy. Which doesn't exist in Dalek Attack. It's not a multi-Doctor story, nor even remotely what you might call a timey-wimey one. At no point is there any in-universe possibility for another Doctor or companion to be taking over matters. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 10:27, October 24, 2019 (UTC)

Different Game Versions

In doing research for the purpose of figuring out whether the sewer boss could be more conclusively identified as either a Horrorkon or a Terrorkon, I found that the game has some version differences that are more significant than just graphical fidelity. While the Amiga, Atari ST, and MS-DOS releases seem broadly identical, those on the Commodore 64 and ZX Spectrum diverge quite a bit. Taking the aforementioned sewer boss as an example: In the Amiga version, it is two-headed, on the Commodore 64 it's one-headed, and on the ZX Spectrum it is absent from the sewer level altogether. While the latter can be ignored for the purposes of the page (and that sewer level as a whole might be different enough from its counterparts to be considered a different event altogether), would the "large vicious mutant" be two-headed in one account and one-headed in another? Would the game have to be split into different pages in order to cite the versions separately? Or does the more graphically advanced version take precedence? Look-a-troopa ☎ 23:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

There's a system within {{cite source}} to cite different editions of the same story, which seems perfect for this, although it does mean that specific additional templates will need to be added to this page, i.e. multiple {{store variant data}} hidden templates for each edition. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 01:18, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Would the Amiga/Atari ST/MS-DOS versions be collapsed into one variant (or, perhaps, collectively be considered the default non-variant citation)? I imagine citing "(GAME: Dalek Attack (Amiga), Dalek Attack (Atari ST), Dalek Attack (MS-DOS))" might be a bit excessive, but going by the Wikipedia page, at least the Atari ST version does differ from its otherwise seemingly identical-in-content cohorts in that it features Fifth as a playable Doctor instead of Second (which may or may not be relevant to wiki coverage, looking at the topic above). Look-a-troopa ☎ 04:26, 27 May 2024 (UTC)