Tech, emailconfirmed, Administrators
153,493
edits
Forum:We need a policy on videogames: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
::::Don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying that these Adventure Games are out of bounds. I'm saying that '''I don't know if they are''', and that, based on the implausibility of most videogame play in the past, we need to sort out our canon policy in a more detailed manner than currently exists. Ask yourself this. In the article on Ace, are you prepared to write this sentence: | ::::Don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying that these Adventure Games are out of bounds. I'm saying that '''I don't know if they are''', and that, based on the implausibility of most videogame play in the past, we need to sort out our canon policy in a more detailed manner than currently exists. Ask yourself this. In the article on Ace, are you prepared to write this sentence: | ||
:::::Once, Ace, or possibly the Brigadier, assisted either the Second Doctor, the Fourth Doctor or the Seventh Doctor with a Dalek attack on the planet Skaro. ( | :::::Once, Ace, or possibly the Brigadier, assisted either the Second Doctor, the Fourth Doctor or the Seventh Doctor with a Dalek attack on the planet Skaro. ([[VG]]: ''[[Dalek Attack]]'') | ||
::::If you're not, and I rather suspect no one reasonably is, then why? Why are we willing to accept The Adventure Games, but not other videogames? ''What'' are we willing to accept from ''City of Daleks''? With, say, ''[[Doctor Who and the Mines of Terror]]'', are we willing to accept the narrative events '''in the manual''', or is it just what's actually in the game play itself? For example, can the assertion, | ::::If you're not, and I rather suspect no one reasonably is, then why? Why are we willing to accept The Adventure Games, but not other videogames? ''What'' are we willing to accept from ''City of Daleks''? With, say, ''[[Doctor Who and the Mines of Terror]]'', are we willing to accept the narrative events '''in the manual''', or is it just what's actually in the game play itself? For example, can the assertion, | ||
:::::[[Heatonite]] has a highly complex structure that, at least partially, contains [[uranium]], [[zirconium]] and [[flourine]] ( | :::::[[Heatonite]] has a highly complex structure that, at least partially, contains [[uranium]], [[zirconium]] and [[flourine]] ([[VG]]: ''[[Doctor Who and the Mines of Terror]]'') | ||
::::—a fact that's ''only'' in the manual —be accepted into the body of this wiki? If we do accept material from videogame manuals, then what's our rationale for having definitively rejected material for manuals accompanying the FASA roleplaying game? At what point is the narrative "good enough" that we can assert in a character's article, "<x event> ''definitely'' happened to <y character> ( | ::::—a fact that's ''only'' in the manual —be accepted into the body of this wiki? If we do accept material from videogame manuals, then what's our rationale for having definitively rejected material for manuals accompanying the FASA roleplaying game? At what point is the narrative "good enough" that we can assert in a character's article, "<x event> ''definitely'' happened to <y character> ([[VG]]: ''[[Videogame name]]'')." '''[[User:CzechOut|<span style="background:blue;color:white">Czech</span><span style="background:red;color:white">Out</span>]]''' [[User talk:CzechOut|☎]] | [[Special:Contributions/CzechOut|<font size="+1">✍</font>]] 12:40, June 10, 2010 (UTC) | ||
:::::I'd say the point where we can say "<x event> ''definitely'' happened to <y character> ( | :::::I'd say the point where we can say "<x event> ''definitely'' happened to <y character> ([[VG]]: ''[[Videogame name]]'')." is when the player doesn't have a choice. When they have a choice like the one with Ace above, on the character's page should be something along the lines of "In the Game ''Dalek Attack'', the player had the opportunity to play as Ace and assist either the Second Doctor, the Fourth Doctor or the Seventh Doctor with a Dalek attack on the planet Skaro. ([[VG]]: ''[[Dalek Attack]]'')" Then after it we can say "However, due to the nature of the game, it is debated as to whether these events are canon or not." Like I said above, I think we have to take each game as it comes, and not have a strict policy. --[[User:The Thirteenth Doctor|The Thirteenth Doctor]] 13:18, June 10, 2010 (UTC) | ||
::::::Well if anyone HAS read ''[[Head Games]]'', the Doctor puts to exact detail what happened in Dalek Attack and that it was still in the Land of Fiction. So we assume the Fourth and Second Doctors were conjured up in the Land of Fiction and is definate that Davros and the Daleks in there also part of the land of fiction. But put it this way, for example in the Star Wars video games, the games are all considered into consideration of being canon even with all the choices that are made. --[[User:Vitas|Vitas]] 13:29, June 10, 2010 (UTC) | ::::::Well if anyone HAS read ''[[Head Games]]'', the Doctor puts to exact detail what happened in Dalek Attack and that it was still in the Land of Fiction. So we assume the Fourth and Second Doctors were conjured up in the Land of Fiction and is definate that Davros and the Daleks in there also part of the land of fiction. But put it this way, for example in the Star Wars video games, the games are all considered into consideration of being canon even with all the choices that are made. --[[User:Vitas|Vitas]] 13:29, June 10, 2010 (UTC) | ||
:::::::Destiny of the Doctors would have worked far better as a CDROM based encyclopaedia than a game (fighting an Auton with a fire extinguisher...) | :::::::Destiny of the Doctors would have worked far better as a CDROM based encyclopaedia than a game (fighting an Auton with a fire extinguisher...) | ||
