Jump to content

Talk:2015 in video games

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Global view

[edit]

When I looked at the talk page of other pages like Talk:2011 in video gaming and Talk:2010 in video gaming and some editors suggested to add a global release date, So I have came up with this. Would this look tedious or confusing?

Month American
release 		Europe
release 		Title Platform(s) Ref (s)
M
A
R
C
H
 		10 13 Atelier Shallie: Alchemists of the Dusk Sea PS3
17 19 Battlefield Hardline Win, PS3, PS4, X360, XBO
20 Final Fantasy Type-0 HD PS4, XBO
Project CARS Win, PS4, XBO
TBA TBA Armello Win, Mac, Lin, iOS, Droid, Windows Tablet

AdrianGamer (talk) 11:34, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't think that it's confusing at all, I think that they might understand this pretty well, ya know! :) Norozco1 (talk) 14:32, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I will start making it then. However, do you mind adding 2 release date into the list? I mean, it could be very troublesome sometimes. AdrianGamer (talk) 02:51, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What about adding source for each game. There is already a lot of source for all the unscheduled release. Do you think it is a good idea to add them also in the list of Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4? It will be good for reader but bad for editor since it would be extremely troublesome. If added it would look something like 2015 in film. AdrianGamer (talk) 03:20, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, i don't think so because i do think that it's a good idea to add them also in the list of Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4, and beside, this could be a great way of clarifying the release dates, we just need to find a good balance for this, so that both readers and editors think that it's good for the article and not extremely troublesome, ya know. :-) Oh, and to answer your previous question, then no, i really don't mind adding 2 release date into the list, because if there was an announced about the 2 release date, then i'll be very glad for you to do so, OK! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 04:27, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
How does this work when the games are released in different months, or even different years, for different regions? Also, we should add fields for at least Australia/New Zealand and Japan as well. IDVtalk 04:19, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Here is an alternate layout. 3 collapsible list (For Europe, Australia and Japan) shown in the article

Pros: Worldwide view
Cons: Can't split the collapsible list at all
AdrianGamer (talk) 06:40, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just remembered how we did it in the (not up to date) Swedish Wikipedia article for 2014 in video gaming, where releases that don't relate to all regions get a European Union, Australia, United States, or Japan - that is, {{flagicon|country name}} - before the game titles. It's not perfect, though - not all European countries are part of the European Union, the North American flag should probably be something like instead, and the Australia icon doesn't include New Zealand. Maybe we should make a new template (and new icons for some regions) for this purpose, called something like Template:Video game region? IDVtalk 09:35, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Could be a good idea. But I prefer an individual column for these flags. AdrianGamer (talk) 10:49, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You mean like this?
Month Date(s) Region(s) Title Platform(s)
M
A
R
C
H
 		1 United States Game PS3, X360, Win
2 AustraliaEuropean Union Game PS3, X360, Win
3 Japan Game PS3
4 European UnionUnited StatesAustraliaJapan Game 3D 3DS
IDVtalk 11:31, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, something like that, I would like to make the flag in the center of the column though. I also think that if the game is released on the same day in different region the flag icon is not really necessary. AdrianGamer (talk) 12:29, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ya know what, I think I agree with this, and we can also try making this work somehow. In fact, we can try to use this for all the years in video gaming article, we wouldn't you agree too? :) Norozco1 (talk) 15:28, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You mean the release date for other countries or the inclusion of source in the Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 lists? AdrianGamer (talk) 08:58, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What about something like this? Then we might not need to make a template specially for the page.
Month Day Region(s) Title Platform (s)
NA EU AU/NZ JP
M
A
R
C
H
 		1 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ Whatever What This Game is 1 PS4, XBO, Win, WiiU
2 ✔ Whatever What This Game is 2 PS4, XBO, Win, WiiU
3 ✔ ✔ Whatever What This Game is 3 3DS, Wii
3 ✔ ✔ Whatever What This Game is 4 Win, OS X, Lin

AdrianGamer (talk) 08:53, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, much better than the flag thing in my opinion. Would we even need to fill in ✘s though? Would be easier to quickly see which region the release is for if there only were ✔s for relevant regions, and the table cells for other regions were empty. I'd also prefer if the text for the Australia/New Zealand region were something like AU/NZ rather than just AUS. (also, looks like the message order on this page got messed up somehow?) IDVtalk 09:12, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have changed the list a little. Do you mean something like that? AdrianGamer (talk) 11:01, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Of course we do, this idea of yours is absolutely perfect for the article, we just got to figure if we even need to fill in ✘s though or not, do you think that we do? :/ Norozco1 (talk) 12:48, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We don't need the ✘s I guess, save much time and effort. It has no real use actually. empty the column is the same as putting a ✘ there. AdrianGamer (talk) 14:25, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, i totally agree, and besides, it'll make things a lot easier to let people know what regional video games are going to be released from different regions, to America, ya know? :-) Norozco1 (talk) 21:37, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Great, I will start implementing the plan once I have time :) AdrianGamer (talk) 09:29, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK then, lets hope that you'll be able to do this plan, because this idea of your is going to turn out great for the article, ya know? :) Norozco1 (talk) 12:51, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
:) AdrianGamer (talk) 15:58, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
:-) Norozco1 (talk) 21:34, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry for not being able to do this this week, I will probably get it done next week. AdrianGamer (talk) 10:10, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so until then, we'll wait! :) Norozco1 (talk) 12:33, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So, I have attempted trying to implement the plan, and it didn't work out as expected. It feels it was severely overdone, the list would be massive. It would be something like the list in 2014 in video game but 3-4 time bigger. (It wasn't THAT big when I attempt to do it, but I can foresee it will be when the year end) It is not a good thing. The plan and the layout don't really seems to work, at least for me... AdrianGamer (talk) 16:40, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So what now, after finding out that the plan didn't work out, then are we just going to stick with the way it is, because we really need to find a way to make this work for the article, ya know! :/ Norozco1 (talk) 17:11, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I guess the collapsible list might work. They are actually 3 separate lists instead of 1 gigantic list and probably won't result in the problem I mentioned. AdrianGamer (talk) 04:47, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, so lets try giving that list a shot and see how it goes from here, Ok! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 05:34, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So, I have done the list. Do you think it looks good or bad? AdrianGamer (talk) 04:34, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think it looks good to be honest! :) Norozco1 (talk) 12:24, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resident Evil 7

[edit]

Resident Evil 7 is an upcoming in 2015, He sequel to Resident Evil 6.

You need to have a source to prove that. Remember it has to be announced and unveiled officially. AdrianGamer (talk) 04:39, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Paper Mario for Wii U

[edit]

Paper Mario is working for the title for the Wii U, Return to 64 and Thousand Year Door.

You need to have a source to prove that. Remember it has to be announced and unveiled officially. AdrianGamer (talk) 11:51, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May Section

[edit]

Mario Party 10 and Just Cause 3 are listed as a May releases from what I can see from the list and their respective, I am not certain about the release date, but what I know is announced them as a Q2 release respectively. Should we put it back to unscheduled releases section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.20.206.161 (talk) 02:46, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]


We need the developer or the publisher itself reveal the release date. If they didn't then these games should stay in the unscheduled releases part. AdrianGamer (talk) 16:42, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, when you put it like that, then it truly clarifies some things, so i guess i've to agree with you on that note, ya know! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 05:39, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

April Section

[edit]

Dead Island 2, EA Sports PGA Tour, Etrain Mystery Dungeon, Omega Quintet, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask 3D and Yoshi's Woolly World are listed as a April releases from what I can see from the list and their respective, I am not certain about the release date, but what I know is announced them as a Spring and a Q2 release respectively. Should we put it back to unscheduled releases section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.20.206.161 (talk) 20:58, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No way, keep them actually as they are, okay! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 22:02, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Droid

[edit]

You know that Droid is not an abbreviation for Android? It is a trademark of Verizon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4640:B626:0:94D0:8DF1:817B:80AE (talk) 10:24, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why yes, yes it is! :) Norozco1 (talk) 15:20, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I propose replacing "Droid" with "Android", if no one objects, as Android is the proper term. 65.95.223.27 (talk) 11:23, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This conversation on the "2015 in video gameing" talk page makes no sense, really. As a matter of fact, this belongs to Template talk:GamePlatformKey, though it has already been discussed there under the Android section. Lordtobi (✉) 11:39, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

[edit]

I am questioning on Data Hacker: Rebooted and Seduce Me's notability. They weren't covered by any media coverage or any reliable source. They can't be verified. Not saying that small independent games from Kickstarters can't be listed here but I think that only the notable one, like Queens at Arms, which was covered by reliable source (Hardcore Gamer) should be listed. AdrianGamer (talk) 11:22, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but Data Hacker: Rebooted has been staff pick by the kickstarter company, so you can say that it was covered by media coverage, and hold any reliable source on kickstarter, ya know! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 11:54, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Data Hacker: Rebooted can keep in the list permenently. But for Seduce Me, I am not sure. I can't exclude the possibility of it being covered tomorrow or after its releases. Therefore, I proposed to delete them from the list if there is really zero coverage of the game approximately 1-2 months after it was released. AdrianGamer (talk) 12:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

www.siliconera.com/2015/02/13/otome-visual-novel-seduce-me-flirts-with-steam-greenlight/ 138.130.73.62 (talk) 19:04, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

and they do have that, there just bound to be some coverage about them somewhere, we're just not looking hard enough, so lets just keep Seduce Me and Data Hacker: Rebooted on the list for now, and unless find some coverage for those games, then they'll soon stay on the list permanently, ok! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 14:27, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have made a list of such video games. Not only kickstarters I also think that sources from Steam and developer blog/youtube's channel should be avoided. If source came from any of the listed one it will be perfect.
Okay, two more sources is fair enough! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 12:12, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, nice list of gaming notability, and don't worry, we'll find these sources for some of them, ok! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 12:45, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And by the way, we need the game to receive "significant" coverage, so 1 reliable sources is not enough. I proposed to have at least 2 for particularly these titles. AdrianGamer (talk) 08:32, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

release date reveals

[edit]

Hey guys, i just check onto Gamestop, and i think that i might've found a list of video games with release date, check it out: http://www.gamestop.com/browse/role-playing?nav=28-rp0,136a hope that you and this as a source for this page guys! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 21:55, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can be useful when we are double checking all the release dates by the end of the year. However, source from retailers like this is not recommended for future release. By the way Sorry for the late reply. I forget to check the talk page. AdrianGamer (talk) 16:16, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's ok, but this is just a possibility from a retailer site, so if we find an actual source that is connected to this, then it'll show if the release dates are completely accurate or not, ya know! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 21:31, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I want to know

[edit]

Why do we need to use Q1/Q2/Q3/Q4 instead of seasons for games that are unscheduled? It can be confusing for people who don't know quarters. LightShark1 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:05, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, i agree, there's only some seasons on some games, and on the other games, it just doesn't, so why? :-/ Norozco1 (talk) 10:36, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seasons aren't the same all around the world. When it's summer in the northern hemisphere, it's winter in the southern. See WP:SEASON. IDVtalk 10:59, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I know that, but this doesn't answer LightShark1's previous question, so tell us, please! :-( Norozco1 (talk) 11:37, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@LightShark1:@Norozco1: It is even confusing for people living in Southern Hemisphere if we use seasons instead of quarter. Imagine when people living in Australia (located in southern hemisphere), when they see Elite: Dangerous getting a Xbox One port in summer. They might think that it will be released in something like November 2015. We don't want to confuse or mislead people. Using Quarter to indicate release is the most precise and the most accurate way. That is also the same reason why I proposed to created separate sections for release dates in Europe and Australia. You can see WP:WORLDVIEW for more details. Maybe we can add a note near the approximate date row in the unscheduled release section to tell people what quarter is, then it won't confuse people anymore. AdrianGamer (talk) 15:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@AdrianGamer: Yeah, i agree dude, but how are we going to do that exactly? :-/ Norozco1 (talk) 20:37, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really see how this is a problem. If you really want to, I guess you could do something like Q1/Q2, but it's not a very difficult concept tbh. IDVtalk 21:03, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh really, then tell us, how is this situation not a very difficult concept exactly? :-/ Norozco1 (talk) 23:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's just dividing the year into four parts: January-March, April-June, July-September, and October-December. But yeah, I don't mind if we link Q1, Q2, etc, to Calendar year#Quarters, so people who don't know about quarters can learn. --IDVtalk 02:06, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ok then, that changes things, because that completely blown my mind, ya know! :-O Norozco1 (talk) 03:13, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Virtual Console

[edit]

I personally don't think that games for Virtual Console needed to be listed here because our Template:GamePlatformKey don't have anything called WiiUVC. Maybe we can simply put a link to List of Virtual Console games for Wii U (North America) in a See also section instead of putting everyone of them here?. AdrianGamer (talk) 09:32, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, i think that games for Virtual Console needed to be listed here because even if they are just virtual consoles, people need to know when the games are coming out, ya know! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 12:10, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're right imo, VC games are basically emulated ports of games, and I don't think emulations, even official ones should be added LightShark1 (talk) 15:59, 18, April 2015 (UTC)
I know, right! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 20:43, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Or maybe we could have another collapsible list for them in the bottom of the page. It just feels, well, odd to have them listed in the main list. AdrianGamer (talk) 05:26, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Really, how so?! :-/ Norozco1 (talk) 05:47, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Do the same thing what we did with the worldwide collapsible lists, but this time, with the emulations. It's that freaking simple. .-_.- LightShark1 (talk) 08:26, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's that simple, ya know! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 13:14, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@AdrianGamer @Norozco1 You know what? Let's just remove these VC games. Making another collapsible list would waste a lot of time and would add up the number of bytes, the games in List of Virtual Console games for Wii U (North America) are probably more senseful than added more lists. LightShark1 (talk) 14:29, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we are actually listing other ports here so it is a bit unfair if we simply entirely remove them from here. It had to be somewhere here, probably a short See also section can help. But my main concern is that the limitation of the template will not allow us from inserting things like "WiiUVC" here. AdrianGamer (talk) 15:01, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe a see also section would do, but I don't think VCs or any other emulations need to be involved. I'm fine with downloadable games, but emulations would probably doubt to make sense to be here unless it's covered by reliable sources. LightShark1 (talk) 15:10, 21, April 2015 (UTC)
@AdrianGamer @LightShark1 Come on guys, there has to be a way that we can make a compromise on this predicament, and besides, you know as much as i do that people need to know when those games are coming out, ya know! :-/ Norozco1 (talk) 20:44, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, List of Virtual Console games for Wii U (North America) can solve your problem about people needing to know when the VC games come. But, please guys, make your final decision, I don't want this going on for a week. LightShark1 (talk) 03:04, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I know that, and we will, but let's that whatever our final decision is going to be, it'll be the right one, i can tell, ya know! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 03:14, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you guys don't disagree I will start removing them out there. AdrianGamer (talk) 11:22, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, it's not our fault that we can't agree on something, but at least that i'm giving some effort to work on a compromise to this situation that we're having, ya know! :-/ Norozco1 (talk) 12:03, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am not blaming anyone here. Like what LightShark1 has stated above, if people are looking for release dates for virtual console video games, they can go to that few pages, and that the template limitation here will not allow them to stay in the main list of this page. AdrianGamer (talk) 12:35, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@AdrianGamer: @Norozco1: You know what? Let's do a see also section not only to make you guys stop whining (no offense) about the decision, but because ALL VC games are listed in the List of Virtual Console games for Wii U (North America) page and to make the console table a non-limit. LightShark1 (talk) 13:04, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree to have a See also section as well. AdrianGamer (talk) 13:45, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good, I'll start doing it now. LightShark1 (talk) 14:00, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ok then, i guess that the decision is over with?! :-/ Norozco1 (talk) 20:32, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Final Fantasy VII

[edit]

It's noted that FF7 has been listed for a 2015 release date.

It may be worth clarifying that this is the release date for the enhanced port of the original PS1 version, and not the remake version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.130.73.62 (talk) 18:58, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Worldwide view

[edit]

So, I am proposing to get rid of that worldwide view table. (Yes, I know I requested and implemented it). After several months, I have realized that the list did not work. It was unsourced, and it looks odd, and just generally out of place. So, I attempted to remove it completely, and was opposed. We can either implement the plan in 2016 in video gaming, or just remove it. I personally prefer to remove the list completely and use the 2016 page as a new starting point, since that plan may not work as intended as well. AdrianGamer (talk) 10:34, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think it needs to be changed, while the information needs to be retained. It's weird to have a list of American releases, and then a The Rest Of The World list. Even if all the information were still there, the presentation would still be biased to America in that format. We would probably have to either have one big list that includes all regions, or one list for each region, each presented as equally important...--IDVtalk 11:28, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to make them into the same list for 2016 in video gaming, with notes saying that they are Japan-only games, or localized western releases. I do not really see the need of including European release here, since games usually release there slightly earlier or later than North America. Perhaps we just list their first release date in the western world (for example, Yoshi's Woolly World would be listed on June 25 instead of October 16, and Kirby and the Rainbow Curse would be listed on February 20 instead of May 8) There is also another way to list games in this list. Follow their most initial release. For example, we include Fire Emblem Fates here but not in the 2016 page even though it is set to be released in western countries in 2016. We do not need to mention the Japanese release date for western games, similar to the guideline mentioned in Template:Infobox video games. AdrianGamer (talk) 14:29, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, i don't think that we should get rid of the worldwide view table, cause if we did that, then people won't be able to know when other places are going to release their games, so i suggest that instead of doing that, move it, and make a new page for this section, and attach a link to this page, so that other people can know where to go, and find out when other regions will release their games at different place, so is that fair enough for everyone?! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 22:20, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I haven't been in this place in forever. Okay, serious talk time. I think you should remove it because it's more than priceless. I mean, just look at it. It's stale at it's finest. It's lazy and maybe even pointless to restart the trial. Also, the page never said "North American view". This means you should've added at least some games instead adding a list for release outside the region. Highlighting my full opinion time is over. Let's just say it's best to do the same formula by adding the worldwide releases to the list of exact dates. LightShark1 (talk) 05:52, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ya, and i still highly suggest that you reconsider this decide, and make a new page ok! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 12:33, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Norozco1: I do not agree with having separate pages. The article name is "2015 in video gaming". It is about the things happened in this world in this year. The release dates should either be mixed together into one giant list, or have a separate list, but they should never be split away. We can either choose to remove it, or to integrate it into the main list. I personally prefer to remove it for now. I intended to use the 2016 page as a new starting point. If that ref label system worked, then I can come back and implement it here. (That's why I hide it instead of completely remove it)
@AdrianGamer: Ok, i guess it's fair enough, but under the retrospect, i would choose to integrate it into the main list rather then removing it. However, someone did something like this before, when he posted the idea of splitting the characters, so if that's the case, then why is this any different exactly?! :-/ Norozco1 (talk) 21:34, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Norozco1: Well, here's how it's different. You see as in the style of the following year, the Japanese releases in the lists are sourced compared to the (possibly later) vanished list of international releases in this page. The list in here, it needs more reliability than it has now. A simple release date, game and platform(s) doesn't mean it is reliable or relevant. If I had the time, I would add some sources to the list, but we're right here now. So, I'm considering Adrian's right. Maybe we should remove it and take his suggestion. But that's my opinion. Don't take much pressure on the thought. LightShark1 (talk) 03:42, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@LightShark1: Wouldn't dream of it, but still, his suggest would be for us to choose either choose to remove it, or to integrate it into the main list, and as far as things are going, i would rather integrate it into the main list option, ya know! :-/ Norozco1 (talk) 06:31, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I think I found a way how to keep the worldwide view reliable. Ingrating all games into the list. But this time, I'm gonna show you how it should be done. Here's an example.
Month Day Title Platform
M
A
R
C
H
 		24 Bloodbourne [NA] PS4
25 Bloodbourne [AUS] [EU] PS4
26 Bloodbourne [JP] PS4
27 Bloodbourne [UK] PS4
Notes

NA indicates game release exclusively in North America
AUS indicates game release exclusively in Australia
EU indicates game release exclusively in Europe
JP indicates game release exclusively in Japan
NA indicates game release exclusively in the United Kingdom

I tried making it like the last lists shown several sections back while making it similar to the list in 2016 in video gaming. On another note unrelated to this, we do not have to know if a game is a international release of a Japan-exclusive game. It's just senseless if other people knew about the exclusive. Okay, so that's all the explanation I have to show you guys. Ping me if you have suggestions/opinions on these. LightShark1 (talk) 13:48, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@LightShark1: impressive, but just keep the North America releases separate, cause we like to keep thing separate, just like this article, but all and all, it's a great idea and i think that this kind of method could work, ya know! ;-) Norozco1 (talk) 14:32, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sources seldom covers Australian and Japanese releases so it would be really difficult. It also makes the list to feel unnecessarily huge. It is a nice proposal, but I do not find it practical. I personally prefer that we list games' first release in the western world. It is simple and straightforward. Their release dates aren't that different anyway. Maybe we should not aimed for a worldwide view, but instead aimed for fairness, an unbiased way. "First" release date could achieve that in my opinion. To me the only special case is Japan, as some of their games may never, or take several years to make their way out. That's why we need to mention "exclusivity" releases. If Japan isn't this important in the industry we can ignore it actually. AdrianGamer (talk) 15:29, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Famitsu has a really good database of video game releases in Japan - I have never not found a console (home or handheld) game in it, it's only lacking in PC games (but even then, a lot of PC games are there too). Just type (or paste) the game's Japanese title in the search box, and click the "ゲームタイトル" ("game title") tab. Anyway, I feel like this discussion should take place at or be linked to from the VG wiki project, since it would affect a lot of "19XX/20YY in video gaming" articles.--IDVtalk 16:01, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well in my opinion, i think that is one of the most important factor of our gaming generation, and besides, their going to be showing alot of video games that'll coming next year, ya know! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 23:37, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


@LightShark1: What about something like this - detailing the other regions if the dates are different?
Month Day Title Platform Other Regions
M
A
R
C
H
 		24 Bloodbourne [NA] PS4 25 March [AUS] [EU], 26 March [JP], 27 March [UK]
Borderlands: The Handsome Collection [NA] PS4, XBO 26 March [AUS], 27 March [EU] [UK], 14 May [JP]
26 Theatrhythm Dragon Quest [JP] 3DS
27 Ride [AUS] [EU] [UK] PS4, PS3, XBO, X360, Win 14 May [JP], 19 May [NA]
Two issues I can see - we would need to make a decision about listing by first release date or Western release date - personally, I'd go by first global release - and if we should keep EU/UK/AUS separate each time or group them together as either EU or maybe PAL when they are all the same.
What do you think? 87.112.29.134 (talk) 08:36, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
better, so i think we can work with this as well! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 14:01, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What if it is something like Fire Emblem Fates, which was released in different years in different regions? I personally has given up on the idea of worldwide view. It is not feasible. I am over-ambitious when I proposed it last year. AdrianGamer (talk) 14:49, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@AdrianGamer: No way, you wouldn't that over-ambitious when you proposed it last year, in fact, it's quite the opposite, and i think that it's one of that greatest ideas that anyone has ever comeup with, which is exactly why we can't give up on the idea now, and neither should you, in which case, you could at least take LightShark1's idead into some consideration, ok! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 15:02, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 2015 in video gaming. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on 2015 in video gaming. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:47, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2015 in video gaming. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:51, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:2023 in video games which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 18:20, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2015_in_video_games&oldid=1196697578"