Jump to content

Talk:Life Is Strange 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleLife Is Strange 2 has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 29, 2021Good article nomineeListed

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:36, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Third entry"

[edit]

The second one would be "Before The Storm", I assume. Is not it technically more like a spin off, as Captain Spirit? Maybe it would be more correct to say "It will be second main entry of the Life Is Strange series". Lone Internaut (talk) 04:52, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely sure Captain Spirit could be considered a spin-off, considering it was marketed as a demo, and released as a prequel... (Which, technically takes place during LIS2. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:15, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sean's age

[edit]

According to several articles[1][2][3][4] Sean is 16, however there seems to be a dispute regarding is age, with many insisting that he is 17. I haven't played the game yet, is he said to be that age in the game? The Life Is Strange Wiki[5] is also not decisive on the case. Lordtobi (✉) 08:03, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's set in October 2016 and Sean has an ID card that gives his DOB as some time in May 2000, so he's 16. Will Bradshaw (talk) 15:10, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's even said in Dialogue. The Dad specifically calls him 16. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:03, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? If it's so obvious, why did multiple people change it to 17? Lordtobi (✉) 09:06, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
His official date of birth is August 15th, 2000, and the game takes place in October, 2016. However, I believe a newspaper clipping somewhere has his age down at 17, which is where the confusion lies. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:11, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The specific age is irrelevant to understanding the plot. Cognissonance (talk) 04:29, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. His age is quite important, not only for factual accuracy of the article, but because it's important that Sean is underage. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:13, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

British English

[edit]

As much as I am British, and thus prefer to use British English wherever I can, is there any reason why this article is tagged for British English? The game itself is set in the United States, and the developer is French. I can't see any connection to Britain here.

BE is the one used first, so it's mostly NATRET(?)/STYLERET. I tagged the article when people started changing "behaviour" -> "behavior". Lordtobi (✉) 13:55, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't this mostly to be used when there are no guidelines in place for style? It just seemed odd to me. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:00, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I used British English in Life Is Strange because Dontnod is in Europe. Used the same spelling in Before the Storm and Captain Spirit because the first article used it, even though Deck Nine is in America. No reason not to use it here too. Cognissonance (talk) 04:26, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Who ever writes the article can choose the locale. 20:55, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

macOS and Linux

[edit]

I work for Feral Interactive, the company bringing Life is Strange 2 to macOS and Linux. My conflict of interest is disclosed in my bio and my edits are intended to ensure factual correctness. I understand that editors of this page may not wish me to make edits due to my conflict of interest.

Please note, the following line is not in keeping with what has been officially announced about the macOS and Linux version:


"The finished series will be released for macOS and Linux by Feral Interactive in 2019."

We have purposefully not stated which episodes will be released for macOS/Linux in 2019 because this is TBD. Keep in mind that that there is no information about when the game will be finished on any platform. I suggest the official macOS/Linux wording:


"Life is Strange 2 will be released for macOS and Linux by Feral Interactive in 2019."


If you would like to be specific about episodes, I suggest:


"Episode 1 will be released for macOS and Linux by Feral Interactive in 2019, with release plans for other episodes to be announced later." Feral steph (talk) 07:48, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for declaring your WP:COI Feral steph. I've made a change which is somewhere in the middle. Hopefully it is suitable. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:23, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Accolades

[edit]

I removed these accolades. They are really not notable, and outwith policy, and at the same time promotional. scope_creep (talk) 20:57, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

[edit]
Issues fixed. There is no point in continuing this discussion. AdrianGamer (talk) 10:05, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

As you're not willing to reply to messages on your talk page and prefer to just blank it, I'll tag you here Sebastian James. Hardcore Gamer is a source used on a large variety of video game articles; in fact it is used to source other information on the same article. PhillisMinaj (talk) 16:10, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Unless it's a press release, blog post etc, either it's a WP:RS or it isn't. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:25, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The complaint is that the article is based on a Spotify account, which generally isn’t a reliable source. Edit warring over maintenance templates isn’t the way to go. Kleuske (talk) 16:33, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article isn't based on a Spotify account, anyone playing the game can hear the songs for themselves; it's merely mentioning that the developer has also created a playlist for the songs in the game on Spotify.
It's strange you're inserting yourself into this discussion after also querying my other actions as an editor and then warning me for edit warring but not warning the other user who is actually unwilling to contribute to the discourse other than leaving snarky edit summaries. I've not edited for a very long time but we used to call that wikistalking back in the day. PhillisMinaj 16:39, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Sebastian James if you're going to just leave messages on my talk page saying I'll be blocked if I don't discuss this on the article talk page then you should probably start contributing to the discussion yourself. PhillisMinaj 17:02, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

First of all, you have failed to ping me. That's not how you ping an editor. Secondly, I am not the one who got a warning for 3RR. You have not written an explained summary and just kept repeating "Hardcore Gamer is a source used on a large variety of video game articles; in fact it is used to source other information on the same article." Every video game editor knows that. Explain the situation. I didn't say the article is based on a Spotify account. The article is based on a Spotify list. Read WP:CIVIL; these are not "snarky" edits: (Not reputable when it is using Spotify as a source, is it? Stop edit warring., Basically uses Spotify and is the only news about this soundtrack right now.) and I'm not "trolling". I didn't see that the article was added by your IP at first, then I searched about that source and it was the only article that mentions anything about LiS 2 soundtrack and uses Spotify as a source, the first sentence from the article is "Dontnod Entertainment has updated its Spotify channel with songs that feature on the official soundtrack for Life Is Strange 2." Be kind. Sebastian James what's the T? 17:26, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't the game already have credits for its music ingame? You can cite that as a WP:PRIMARY source. It's clearly verifiable. However this is a secondary source used here. I'm not really sure how it's a problem in usage. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:33, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's been a while since I've edited Wikipedia, how do I go about changing the source I used from the article to just the video game the article is about? PhillisMinaj 17:42, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
I left a message on your talk page and you blanked it and told me not to message you. I didn't get a warning for 3RR either, not sure why you're saying that. I explained the situation, stop being obnoxious, it's clear from playing the game that the songs are there. PhillisMinaj 17:42, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Because you haven't read the top of my talk page, which basically says "If I reverted your edit, just take it to the article's talk page." Can't you see this giant 3RR warning on your talk page sent by Kleuske? The songs are there, yes, but where are the sources which state that the songs were included in the official soundtrack except for Spotify mentioned by Hardcore Gamer? You should stop accusing falsely, and be civil. Sebastian James what's the T? 17:50, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Uninvolved editor here, I’m just going to laugh at the irony of Sebastian asking others to be civil.
Phillis is right that page blanking is confusing. This is who dispute is silly and not worth edit warring over, however. You really shouldn’t need to bring in a third opinion for something as trivial as this, but if this is how the tone is going to be you might need to consider it. Toa Nidhiki05 17:58, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I did have a peek at his talk page history when he blanked it and it does seem like he's deleting a lot of disagreements and warnings, but hey, maybe everyone else is the problem. PhillisMinaj 18:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
That doesn't change the fact that you were refusing to discuss it. Go back and count them, I didn't break 3RR. This is beyond pointless at this stage; you agree that the songs are in the game so why are you saying that it's not reliably sourced? The article isn't claiming they're in some sort of additional product being sold as the official soundtrack. It seems like you're just arguing for the sake of it. PhillisMinaj 18:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
I agree with Lee Vilenski. Hardcore Gamer is a reliable source, so using it should have no problem. The Spotify playlist is created by Dontnod, so it is legit too as a primary source. In fact, Hardcore Gamer is a better choice than using the in-game credits because of its status as a secondary source. AdrianGamer (talk) 18:04, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Since when we are using spotify playlists as a source for soundtracks? Sebastian James what's the T? 18:15, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We're not, we're using the credits from the video game and/or Hardcore Gamer PhillisMinaj 18:18, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Again, "If I reverted your edit, just take it to the article's talk page." says my talk page. That's why I revert messages I receive. You should see your warning on your talk page first, then maybe you will learn that you did actually break 3RR. AND AGAIN, Hardcore Gamer article is based on Spotify: "Dontnod Entertainment has updated its Spotify channel with songs that feature on the official soundtrack for Life Is Strange 2...."
@Toa Nidhiki05, repeatedly wanting me to be civil, and violating WP: CIVIL yourself is one of many reasons why I don't continue to communicate with you. Sebastian James what's the T? 18:23, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You’ve said like five times now that aren’t going to communicate with me, but you keep doing it. Kind of reminds me of when Dwight Schrute “shunned” Andy in The Office. Toa Nidhiki05 18:29, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not interested in your drama and accusations. You said it yourself the music is in the game and that the Hardcore Gamer article talks about Dontnod stating that the songs will feature on the official soundtrack. What is the issue here? Is there actually a problem with mentioning the songs or are you arguing for the sake of not wanting to concede when you're wrong? PhillisMinaj 18:27, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Just for reference, we go on the text of secondary sources. We don't comment on where they get their information. For instance, if a reliable source comments on information given from a non-reliable source, it's deemed reliable information, unless proven otherwise. I have no idea why you'd be this worried over clearly verifiable information. Seems very semantic here. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:31, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski, another editor pointed out that Spotify accounts are "generally isn’t a reliable source". Sebastian James what's the T? 20:05, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, exactly. Hardcore gamer is considered a reliable source. I'll give you an example from my area - cue sports. Cuetracker.net has a site wide ban for being unreliable, however the BBC have been known to use Cuetracker as a source. Is the BBC source then unreliable? Nope. We trust that the editors have done due diligence on investigating. It's an official media release by a publisher. We don't think tweets are reliable, but when they come from official sources, they are useful in some cases. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:15, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to see @ImprovedWikiImprovment's comments about this issue, we had a discussion about TMZ, which is an unreliable source but was used by sources such as People Magazine, USmagazine, National Post, ETonline and NZ Herald. In the end, we didn't include them. Sebastian James what's the T? 20:25, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That was a while ago, you must have a good memory. IMHO, regardless of whether reliable sources have used it, I wouldn’t consider Hardcore Gamer as a reliable source just on that basis, and would prefer a more reliable source if one exists. IWI (chat) 23:45, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hardcore gamer is listed as a reliable source on WP:VG/S. You can't just say "well, this source isn't reliable this one time". Either the source is reliable, or it isn't. I would raise it again at the above if there is a potential consensus for it not to be reliable. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 06:36, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My statement wasn’t conditional; I don’t think it is a reliable source in any circumstance. Anyway it doesn’t matter, if people debate the reliability and other sources exist, we should use those sources instead. Like if we have an event and all newspapers report on it, we use the most reliable, even if some are listed as reliable, for example. IWI (chat) 11:34, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Has that source been discussed much? IWI (chat) 11:37, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with User:ImprovedWikiImprovment. The reliability of a source depends on context. Just because we have accepted Hardcore Gamer as a reliable source doesn't mean we should accept all of their pages, coverages, etc. (especially when they use dubious/unreliable sources). I don't understand why you keep repeating. Sebastian James what's the T? 13:30, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also, as I stated above, HG is still the only source for the soundtrack. Sebastian James what's the T? 13:33, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If there is an issue with the source, this should be discussed at WP:VG/S. I have no idea why this should be discussed here, when it is a reliable source. Your thoughts on how reliable sources should be used is moot, as it is not how wikipedia handles consensus. If the source gets a consensus at VG/S to not be used. Fantastic. If it's deemed "situational", then we can have a conversation like this. If not, it's either in the text of the article, or it isn't. There's no room for thinking that this one page of the RS is unreliable, if we deem everything else reliable. I also don't see how this is contentious information - It's clearly an official spotify account. That makes it a WP:PRIMARY source, sure, but that doesn't mean it can't be verified. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:37, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"The reliability of a source depends on context." is not a moot, I've directly quoted it. I suggest you read WP:RELIABLE before commenting. Also, you cannot verify that the information given is supported by reliable sources, because there is only one source. Exceptional claims require exceptional sources. Sebastian James what's the T? 08:26, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
that would be fine, if what the source was commenting on was not verifiable, or an contentious. However, in this case, the text is: Licensed tracks include, among others, songs from Phoenix, The Streets, Sufjan Stevens, and Gorillaz.
This is clearly verifiable information, and I'm pretty sure there is even an in game track listing. It's also not controversial information. A source being situational should be brought up at WP:VG/S, which would be fine if it were deemed so, or unrelaible. A local consensus here wouldn't be any better than one at the wikiproject.
Plus, just for reference, it's not the only place that comments on these artists, as another review (unsure of reliability) mentions this here: [6] Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:39, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Notification: The source you presented only writes "The Gorillaz, Justice, and Milk & Bone are all solid additions to the ever-growing soundtrack.", in this case, the sentence should be "Licensed tracks include, among others, songs from Gorillaz." Sebastian James what's the T? 09:57, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Changes in style from previous game articles

[edit]

Hi @OceanHok:, appreciate someone experienced looking over this article again. The previous game articles were primarily written by the same people and all passed "good article" status. I would like the article styles to stay consistent, so I think these should easer be applied to the previous "good articles" too or be reverted. Specifically:

  • Feral as EFN note
  • Collapsed 5 release dates in infobox
  • Decapitalized 'is' (see discussions on the talk pages and VG talk)
  • Table for 5 release date

Regards IgelRM (talk) 01:17, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@OceanHok: After checking your changes; You have split the reception paragraphs into story and storytelling, which seems non-standard. You have also removed per episode reception and the reception summary, which are part of all the previous games articles. Also you have removed awards, which were reported by notable sources. While the section was in need of a rewrite before, it looks to me like this is still the case after these unconventional changes. IgelRM (talk) 04:27, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@IgelRM: - Hi! For this article, I mostly follow the format of Hitman (2016 video game), which is a GA I have worked on before. I don't think there is a need to standardized or be consistent though, because these are quite trivial (i.e. they won't affect whether an article becomes GA or not), and different editors have different preferences, and there isn't a correct one. I don't think I have decapitalized "is" in my rewrite. For some of the awards, they are simply not notable/not reported widely by reliable secondary sources. I think ultimately, even as an episodic game, it makes more sense to view this as a complete product, so I only focus on reviews of the Complete Season. If there is an episode that is particularly well-received or poorly received, then I may follow the old format, but it doesn't seem to be the case here. OceanHok (talk) 11:43, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I can follow your reasoning. But I have brought some points over to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games#Episodic_reception,_notability_of_awards_and_regional_releases. IgelRM (talk) 03:53, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Life Is Strange 2/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 14:50, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]


I'll get to this soon. ♦ jaguar 14:50, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I must congratulate you, OceanHok, the impeccable prose and structuring of this article leaves me no choice but to give it an outright pass. I couldn't find any issues to raise, no matter how minor. It is well written, comprehensive and all the references are correctly formatted and reliable. I can understand why you haven't included reviewer scores in the reception box as it would squash the text too much, though if you did take this to FAC some people may request that you add them in. Wish I had more to say, but this deserves its GA status. ♦ jaguar 21:29, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Very late, but I would like to congratulate as well, OceanHok. IgelRM (talk) 10:07, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Life Is Strange which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 18:51, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Life_Is_Strange_2&oldid=1228650485"