Talk:Dreamfall Chapters/Archive 1

Archive 1

Trilogy

It appears someone has misunderstood what Tornquist was saying. From what I understand and if you read what he's said in the blog carefully Dreamfall is consider part 2 of the TLJ trilogy and Dreamfall next now Dreamfall Chapters is part 3/the final part of the trilogy. This duology/trilogy is often compared to Star Wars 4, 5 and 6 if it helps to understand where 5 & 6 are sort of a duology within the trilogy of 4, 5 and 6 Nil Einne 17:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

While you were on it, you could've just deleted the whole paragraph altogether: it's misleading, ambiguous and unreferenced. In other words, unencyclopedic. ^^ --Koveras ^☭ 18:14, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Release date

There is no official information on the release date at the moment, however, several sites claim, either erroneously or on purpose, to know it. Listing them here:

• GamingTrend: May 1, 2010

Considering that the production of the game has not even started yet, such reports are obviously misleading. --Koveras ^☭ 11:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion

Now the Merge Discussion

Uh, can you please point me to a guideline or rule that states that articles on games currently not in production should be deleted even if they have content not included anywhere else? I don't seem to be able to find it... --Koveras ^☭ 14:44, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

(Transfered discussion from my talk page)

I would say WP:FUTURE would stick out the policy supporting the deletion. I would have put on a merge template, but the information on theDreamfall: The Longest Journey page seems adequate at the moment. One must note that StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm, does not have a page, and that game is definitely under production. Oldag07(talk) 22:41, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

AFAIK HotS is an expansion pack, while DC is a standalone game. The weight category is different. :) My main problem with your reasoning is that I don't think that the current section in the Dreamfall article is adequate, compared to the DC article, at the moment.--Koveras ^☭ 07:33, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I haven't done a whole long of research with video games, however for movie sequels show strong precedence for what i am proposing. The future filmsStar Trek XII and The Dark Knight Rises are good examples of this.

Moreover, the majority of Dreamfall chapters is based off that RT's blog. While I agree that RT's blog is an exception to the rule against blogs, the article's reliance on it make it flirt with Wikipedia:ONESOURCE. BothStar Trek XII and The Dark Knight Rises have far more sources discussing rumors about what will happen in these films. Both films have release dates. However, Dreamfall Chapters isn't even under production. As such, while RT discusses in his blog (which is down) what he would like in the game, what discussed in the blog, and hence the article is speculative at best. Note I just played though Dreamfall for the third time a few days ago. Love the game. I just don't think it should have a page yet.Oldag07 (talk) 00:33, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I can understand your reasoning, but I don't entirely agree with it. Tornquist is the main writers of the series, what he wants to see in them is extremely likely to be put in the final product. Therefore, I am opposed to removing the info taken from his blog. I can follow your argumentation for merging DFC into DF article, but only if it results in no loss of current content. --Koveras ^☭ 10:32, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I could live with that compromise Koveras. Merging all of the content onto the Dreamfall page. I'll give it a few more days before making the official move. Oldag07 (talk) 01:16, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Okay, let's run with it. On another topic, what happens to this talk page when the article is redirected? --Koveras ^☭ 00:11, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

This seems pretty useful. WP:MM

New talk page

I figure it would be wise to archive the talk page that came before the game actually went into production. So now we have a talk page that is for the page that has been restored. Oldag07 (talk) 22:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Style

About my recent edit:

• There is no need for a separate subheading for Funding because the Development section is too short to be split into separate sections yet.
• The second paragraph in the intended Funding subsection was redundant to a sentence in the first paragraph, so I removed it.
• The Notes section is empty, so I removed it, too, until it is actually needed.
• The citations should go to the References section (sorted by publication date) and be linked from the appropriate places in the article. Otherwise, the text becomes extremely hard to edit.

As for the stretch goals, their standalone notability is dubious. Goals that are not reached and will not be implemented are not notable by default. Goals that will be implemented should be mentioned in an appropriate context, e.g. Mac and Linux support in the Release section, the Loremaster update in the Gameplay section, etc. Stretch goals like "The Longer Journey" are non-notable because they are too vaguely defined. --Koveras ^☭ 08:34, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

I see what you mean. Eventually however, with the sheer volume of secondary sources reporting on the campaign, a section could be made. Some of this information is noteworthy. I understand why now is not the time for it though. Oldag07 (talk) 17:18, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, if that section grows significantly longer than others, I'll be the first to split it into subsections. The bad example would be Double Fine Adventure, which consists of nothing but the development section at the moment and most of it is the fundraising section. --Koveras ^☭ 17:49, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Setting Section

I can understand the concern for making the background section too large. I think we can afford to expand it to the length that the Dreamfall: The Longest Journey" section is.

Main article: Universe of The Longest Journey

In The Longest Journey, it was established that the Earth consists of two parallel worlds: technology-driven Stark and magic-driven Arcadia, and that transition between the worlds is only possible through an unusual ability called "Shifting". For over twelve thousand years, the Balance between the Twin Worlds has been preserved by the Guardians and SentinelOrder. In 2209, the Shifter April Ryan, was required to restore the 13th Guardian to his duties, and identified as a daughter of the ancient White Dragon.

In Dreamfall, many characters refer to the "Collapse", a catastrophic event that took place in Stark immediately after the events of TLJ. The Collapse is never described in-game, but according to supplemental material and the official website of the game, it caused the loss of such technologies asfaster-than-light interstellar travel, anti-gravity, and neural interfaces and accompanied traumatic supernatural occurrences. In the immediate aftermath, authorities of Stark establish a global police agency called EYE to deal with the rising crime rate and introduce the Wire, an information network connecting all electronic devices on the planet. The Collapse coincided with the rise of the theocratic and industrial Empire of Azadi (Persian: "freedom") in Arcadia, who conquered the Arcadian Northlands, exiled the Sentinels from the region, and propagated their religion. This spawned aresistance movement, of which April is part in Dreamfall.

Thoughts?

Oldag07 (talk) 01:18, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Did you notice the {{Plot}} warning over Dreamfall's setting section? That thing is still there, even though the section was trimmed to the point where it's nigh unreadable since then. Take a look at some FA-class adventure game articles, e.g. Broken Sword: The Shadow of the Templars: that is the very most that the entire plot section (including setting, characters, and themes) can take, and we already have almost as much even before the last playable character has been revealed. Ideally, the setting, characters, and synopsis subsections can be eventually merged into one succinct summary that first introduces all the background info relevant to the plot, then explains the latter while sequentially introducing the key characters. Until the release, the Plot section here is work in progress, so we shouldn't overload it with content we may have to remove later as irrelevant. And readers wishing to know the whole backstory can still read up on it in the previous games' articles.

EDIT: Also, Wikipedia is not keen on the whole setting description thing, as you can see in the fact that Universe of The Longest Journey has been recently cut altogether. --Koveras ^☭ 06:52, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

FU images

Before this devolves into an edit war, let me note that I also view the amount of fair-use images in this article as excessive. The only ones whose inclusion is justified are the infobox image (which should, however, be replaced with the final box art as soon as it becomes available), and the Stark/Arcadia images, since they illustrate the dual world gameplay of the series. However, in the latter case, {{multiple image}} should be used instead of a gallery tag to avoid problems with WP:NFG. The other three images (the screenshots of Zoe and Kian, and the concept art piece) contribute very little to the article, because the current character designs are work in progress, as the developers stressed on mutliple occasions, and are not indicative of the game's graphics in a long term, and the concept art generally has very little to do with the final product and should only be used in conjunction with screenshots of the final product to outline how the concepts evolved over time. --Koveras ^☭ 09:06, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

By what standard are these "excessive"? Yes the images above contribute significantly to the article. They show what the game is about. There are no substitute images for these pictures. And when the final product comes out we can replace them. All of the images on this page are promotional images and i don't see how this is harming RTG. Oldag07 (talk) 14:43, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:NFC requires minimal usage of non-free content, any non-free media harms our m:Mission. However limited restricted usage is acceptable. Unless the file meets WP:NFCC #1,3&8 (especially the second part of 8) the files need to be removed. Werieth (talk) 15:14, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

You fail to see the point, the use is minimal. Oldag07 (talk) 16:47, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

How do you define minimal? I consider minimal to be zero. Also these fail the second part of WP:NFCC#8 (Example File:Zoë Castillo Screenshot 1.jpg is not required to understand the article.) Werieth (talk) 17:42, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Good thing your definition isn't the definition of minimal. Oldag07 (talk) 17:53, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Policy requires as little non-free material as absolutely needed. Please explain why this article is required to include File:Zoë Castillo Screenshot 1.jpg as far as I can see its decorative. Werieth (talk) 18:16, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

"Minimal" use of FU images means "no FU images if at all possible (i.e. only free ones)". However, since that is borderline impossible for games that aren't published by Ubisoft, a rule of thumb for "minimal usage" is to have exactly two FU images: one for the infobox to illustrate the game box art and one screenshot in the Gameplay section to illustrate the game interface and typical gameplay (since these are easier shown than explained in text). Additional FU images may be only used to illustrate specific points raised in the article, such as art direction, graphical technology, design evolution throughout the development cycle, differences between platforms, etc., but they are always there for a specific purpose and not generic game illustrations. I recommend picking five random articles from Category:FA-Class video game articles to see how non-free images are used there. --Koveras ^☭ 19:12, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

This does show the evolution of the development of the game. Oldag07 (talk) 23:22, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

But they do not meet the bar set forth by the second part of #8. Any image can be useful, but the bar for including them is far higher for non-free media. The screen shots will be removed unless you can demonstrate how they meet #8. Werieth (talk) 00:06, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Moreover, they do not show the evolution yet, since there is nothing to compare them with at the moment. "Showing the evolution" would require, for instance, a composite image of three face shots of Zoe (from the original Dreamfall, from the early stages of DFC, and from the released version). I know (but don't have a reliable source, sorry) that there is a large portion of the fandom who disliked the early DFC design of Zoe and the devs promised to update it, so if that statement is paired with the composite image described above, then it would be an illustration of the design evolution. Right now, the three images in question only show work-in-progress that became outdated soon after it was released. --Koveras ^☭ 12:42, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Not only would Koveras's point need to be meet, there would also be a need for associated text and reliable sources to back that up (also the issue would need to be significant, not just interesting ) Werieth (talk) 13:03, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

"Minimal" is a subjective word. I believe more could be put up. Moreover, if you look at most FA's, they have a picture a section. I feel that what is on the page is necessary, another subjective word. Moreover, this is not a FA. nor could it possibly be until the game is released. So why is it undergoing the scrutiny of one? All the images are fair use because all the images are promotional. I really believe RTG would prefer to have them up. There is the letter of the law, and there is common sense. The images make the page better, and they can be replaced when better images come out. I don't see the point of removing them at this point. Oldag07 (talk) 21:10, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

And yes evolution is shown. Concept art to game art. It works. Oldag07 (talk) 21:11, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

However WP:NFCC#8 the second part has not been met, and files have been removed. Showing evolution by itself is not justification for non-free media. Please note that I have not called these files fair use at any point for a reason, Wikipedia uses the term non-free media because our terms and how we use such media is far far more strict than fair use. Werieth (talk) 01:10, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

I still don't think it is correct, but I can live with what you just did, keeping the Stark vs Arcadia sections. Oldag07 (talk) 02:34, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

The FA articles do use more than one image, but the important part is that their images always have an immediate relation to the text they illustrate. Moreover, the FA articles represent the high quality standard that all articles on the same topic (i.e. video games) should strive for, so saying that "this isn't an FA, so it's OK not to comply with the guidelines" is a gross misinterpretation of Wikipedia principles. As for the promotional nature of the images, Wikipedia is not means of promotion, so the only images that should be uploaded are the ones that contribute to the knowledge value of the article, not the ones that the original creator would like to publish on a popular website. Lastly, I can hardly see a connection between the concept art (Zoe with her back to the viewers) and the screenshot (Zoe's face) in question, so the argument that those two somehow illustrate the art evolution is invalid, as well. --Koveras ^☭ 09:54, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Dates format

The rationale for using DMY date formatting in this article instead of any other is as follows:

• MOS:DATE lists it as an acceptable format and does not specify that another format is generally more preferable.
• MOS:DATEUNIFY requires that all date formatting within the article text be consistent. Citations may also follow the same formatting for the sake of simplicity.
• That the game is developed in Norway by Norwegians may not qualify as strong national ties to the topic, but it influenced the choice of date format, and Norway officially uses DMY, as cited in Date format by country.

Regards. --Koveras ^☭ 08:19, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Twitter citation

Here is the Tweet that seems to be a point of contention: "And now #Dreamfall is under attack from horrible racists for being multicultural & pro-immigration socialist propaganda. Tired…but proud." But the statement "Ragnar has described the game as "pro-immigration socialist propaganda"." is a misquotation. Ragnar does not describe the game as such, he merely says that the game is being described as such by other people. At the very least, the sentence in the article text needs to be reworded. However, I am not sure that a Twitter entry commenting on unspecified other people's opinions is notable enough to be cited in the first place. --Koveras ^☭ 09:28, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

While I agree it is a bit ambiguous, if one were to say something like, say, "John Doe is under attack from pacifists for being pro-war", wouldn't it only make sense if you believe that John Doe is actually pro-war? If John Doe isn't pro-war, then he can't "be(-ing)" pro-war, can he?

-Anon  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.144.126.53 (talk) 02:39, 29 October 2014 (UTC) 

Yes, indeed, that would be the most obvious interpretation--but still an interpretation. Wikipedia articles must stick as closely as they can to the word of their citations, especially in matters regarding politics. And while I agree with the assessment of Chapters' political message in that Tweet, it alone is insufficient as a valid citation for the claim you are making in the article. If you want it to remain, you should find a more clear-cut (and preferably third-party) citation for it, like a review or an analysis article.

Oh, and for your information, more than three reverts in a row constitute an edit war, which I wanted to avoid. I will not revert your edits any more until we've cleared this issue here, but I admit I had expected more civility from you. --Koveras ^☭ 07:45, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

We seem to be at an impasse, so I am requesting a third opinion. --Koveras ^☭ 10:18, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

3O Response: declined - I had to remove this post because of lack of thorough discussion between both the parties. Unless both sides present their views adequately, 3O cannot be given. For more information, refer to the main instruction page. Sincerely, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 13:06, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

From the original tweet, it just looks that he is ironically stating what other accused the game for, instead of making an assertion about the game. And a recent comment by him on the game's official forum makes clear that the game is not promoting a specific political view: "No one's trying to shake your convictions or lure you to 'the other side'. This game is not a Marxist recruitment tool: I mean, honestly, after listening to what the characters are saying, how could anyone even think that?" [1]. So I am going to remove the Twitter citation from the article if there is no further opposition. --Tiago Becerra Paolini (talk) 19:19, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! That's exactly the point I've been making all along. --Koveras ^☭ 07:36, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Episode releases table

I am very iffy on whether its current form is best, since it takes way too much space for very little information that could be presented in a much more compact way. It also includes a lot of placeholder fields that could be omitted until further details are revealed, which would make the content even sparser. Lastly, those colored lines are a bit of fancy creativity that is a little out of place in an encyclopedic article. :-) --Koveras ^☭ 05:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Casting

We may be able to salvage some of the old Characters section contents for a new Casting section under production, so I am backing it up here:

The game features three playable characters: Zoë Castillo, Kian Alvane (both of them previously playable in Dreamfall), and Saga, a new protagonist who appears as a toddler in the first interlude. April Ryan, the protagonist of TLJ and the third co-protagonist of Dreamfall, died in the previous installment, but her voice actress Sarah Hamilton is involved with the game, although to how much of a limited extent is still undisclosed. (Red Thread Games (13 February 2013). [http:// www.kickstarter.com/projects/redthread/dreamfall-chapters-the-longest-journey/posts/405082 "Update #5: The voice of April Ryan returns!"]. Kickstarter. Retrieved 13 February 2013. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)) Zoë's voice actress, Ellie Conrad-Leigh, has expressed readiness to reprise her role,(Mulrooney, Marty (6 November 2012). "In Conversation With Ellie Conrad Leigh (Zoë Castillo, Dreamfall: The Longest Journey)". Alternative Magazine Online. Retrieved 1 May 2013.) but RTG have not officially confirmed her return. Gameplay previews thus far have featured Charlotte Ritchie in the role. British actor Nicholas Boulton will voice Kian, taking over the role from Gavin O'Connor.

Other returning characters include Crow, Blind Bob, Benrime Salmin, Roper Klacks, Abnaxus, the Vagabond, Brian Westhouse, Emma de Vrijer, and Reza Temiz.

I figured there wasn't enough reliable info on the casting to warrant its own section, so I instead lumped it into Production. Since it is hard to find reliable non-primary sources for acting credits, I have used the game credits themselves as a ref. In the interest of easier verifiability, here is a link to a Let's Play with an exact time stamp of the credits in question. --Koveras ^☭ 10:02, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dreamfall Chapters: The Longest Journey. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130304090413/http://www.gamespot.com:80/features/taking-the-longest-journey-home-6404653/ to http://www.gamespot.com/features/taking-the-longest-journey-home-6404653/

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) 21:39, 16 December 2016 (UTC)