Jump to content

Talk:PUBG: Battlegrounds/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Notability

There are multiple guidelines this violates (I will link to every one if asked), but I think this game isn't notable to begin with, so I'm likely to nominate it for AfD. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 23:31, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi, yes can you link to guidelines you deem are affected and require deletion. Also you removed again developer interview without giving a reason. There are literally hundreds of articles for that game since around a year, the developer recently was significant responsible for H1Z1 King of the Kill, Arma 2 & 3 Battle Royale mod, and something with DayZ, games which sold millions of copies. While this game here is currently still in development there are no indication that it won't be notable, again post issues you have with the article here. prokaryotes (talk) 03:03, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
The guidelines this article violates are many, which can be seen at MOS:VG and the documentation of the video game infobox. Just to name a few: listing Steam as a publisher (they are a storefront), listing PC instead of the actual OS, the entire unsourced features section (which is WP:GAMECRUFT anyway), WorthPlaying.com is an unreliable source (see WP:VG/S). This isn't even including how bare bones and badly written the entire article is. And literally hundreds of reliable sources? Maybe if you included them into this, this article wouldn't be up for deletion. Also, the creator of this game working on other known games does not give this game any notability by default, so that's an invalid argument. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 03:27, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
The feature section was sourced by a unique Twitch.tv interview source, as for your other complaints please see WP:COMPETENCE, and in particular see WP:BATTLE (since you made 3 reverts in a short time, and AfD on top of it). I could report you for edit warring but i won't since i spent way too much time already to improve Wikipedia and are busy elsewhere. You are disrupting the process of creating a new article, for a genre defining video game title. prokaryotes (talk) 04:09, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

AFD by Editor Dissident93

For the record User:Dissident93 tried to delete the article within hours of creation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Playerunknown%27s_Battlegrounds prokaryotes (talk) 04:12, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Another issue with User:Dissident93. He stated that the game has 'little of info' for the Wiki page which makes him put the page up for deletion. While I added info, an about section, faq, wiki image and more and he keeps reverting the changes to info that shows 'little info' about the game. This is clearly vandalizing a Wiki page which is against the ToS. He was been reported.Azgoodaz (talk) 19:24, 5 March 2017 (UTC)azgoodaz

The game's notability isn't in question anymore (more reliable sources have written about it since the nomination), but that doesn't change the fact that it still has tons of other issues (you bring up the "ToS", but fail to see where the article fails WP:MOSCAPS, WP:GAMECRUFT, WP:ELNO, and possibly you with WP:OWNERSHIP, WP:SPA, and WP:PUPPET). Everytime I attempt to explain them to you, you ignore them and claim I'm "trolling' or "vandalizing". Your actions have also been brought up with members of WP:VG, which include a few admins, by the way. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:31, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Dissident93's edits appear to follow the guidelines, while Azgoodaz reversions appear unwarranted. There's a lot of policies and guidelines to cite for individual changes, but they all are supported from WP:GAMECRUFT, WP:PROMO, WP:WAF, MOS:TM to WP:LEAD and WP:EL, etc. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 20:39, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Features

Repeatedly removed, similar content can probably be better sourced in the future, for now the summary here, per source https://twitter.com/PUBATTLEGROUNDS/status/836062034953289729

  • In an February 2017 Twitch interview with DasMehdi, the creative director mentioned:
  • In-game shop with skin crates
  • Modding
  • Different game modes on release
  • Leaderboards
  • Player progression/customization
  • Different maps
  • Kill cam
  • Spectator cam
  • Match replay
  • Hardcore servers (No crosshair, first person view)
  • BattlEye (Anti cheat software)
  • Weather system prokaryotes (talk) 04:19, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

WP:GAMECRUFT info like this does not belong, and is Twitter the only source you could find? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 06:29, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

This is correct, "feature lists" like this should not be in an article. This is an encyclopedia, not a press release, advertisement, or "the back of the game's box". If you want to write out an actual paragraph, explaining what some of these things are (your average "non-gamer" wouldn't understand what a "skin crate" would be, for example), with sources, go for it. But not in list form like this. Sergecross73 msg me 17:48, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Just got done removing further stuff like a FAQ section (really?), as well as stuff that was clearly copy pasted. Not sure why people don't seem to realize that articles need to follow guidelines to not be total crap. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:04, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
FWIW I'm planning to flesh this article out properly some time this week. Sam Walton (talk) 18:36, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
@Samwalton9: Thanks. I didn't really want to maintain this article alone (I don't even have a personal interest in the game or genre). ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:00, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Article Updates

I think the article could benefit from more infos on weapons/upgrades, and vehicles, and upcoming maps may be. Some content might also be improved through some editing, (Gameplay and development). For example they use a custom Unreal Engine version, and some models from the published UE launcher projects (Racing), or these https://www.unrealengine.com/marketplace/modular-desert-ruins. prokaryotes (talk) 11:50, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Lists of weapons, upgrades, vehicles, etc, is strongly discouraged by WP:VGSCOPE. That type of information is best suited for a Wikia. -- ferret (talk) 11:53, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Oh really, thanks for pointing this out. prokaryotes (talk) 11:54, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Well, mention of vehicles (buggies and boats could be included i guess). prokaryotes (talk) 11:55, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Right, as long as there's a RS, it's perfectly fine to state that the map has vehicles such as cars, jeeps and boats. We just wouldn't present long detailed lists. -- ferret (talk) 11:57, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your input ferret, i suppose more details in those regards will be covered in the weeks and months ahead. prokaryotes (talk) 11:59, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Battle royal(e)

So what is the correct spelling? The existing article battle royal has both spellings, implying either is okay. Since the article name is without "e", that would be the consistent usage. The new article battle royale (gaming) uses "e" but it has exactly 2 references, both to PUBG, which doesn't make it convincing at all. Battle Royale (disambiguation) has a bunch of other uses, but mostly proper names, so not the actual term. I don't really mind either way (though I lean to consistency without "e"), but I'm not clear as to what the reasoning is otherwise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellknowz (talk • contribs) 13:10, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Please join the move discussion at battle royale (gaming), I think that's the best way to get a consensus on the spelling. -- ferret (talk) 13:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Oh whoops. Didn't notice that. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 13:17, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Name of the Game

Obviously the name of the game is written in capital letters (as in on the website or on Steam). I tried to fix this but the bot keeps reverting it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.129.32.112 (talk) 00:56, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

See MOS:TMRULES. -- ferret (talk) 01:16, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

PlayStation 4 version arriving at a later date

On a small number of occasions, project director Changhan Kim has expressly stated that the game is also coming to PlayStation 4 after it exits Xbox game preview, such as on Twitter, and in this interview with South Korean game website Inven Global.[1] The eventual release on both home consoles was picked-up and reported by express.co.uk[2] and mspoweruser.com[3] and the development was reflected in our article by way of the following paragraph:

"In a March 30, 2017 interview, Bluehole's Project Director, Changhan Kim, said the company intended to publish the game on both the Xbox One and PS4." (diff)

The text was promptly deleted with the explanation that South Korean game website Inven Global is not a quality source, but I feel that the reference is sufficiently reliable for Changhan Kim's own words, supported by other sources that have quoted him directly, and others reports that have emerged since. — TPX 12:32, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

EDIT: Here is a link to the original interview.[4] As reported by PushSquare.[5] — TPX 19:41, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I do think the issue is that we have no idea (broadly speaking) about who Inven are, though their founders do show some degree of reputation, so it's not immediately clear if it is a reliable source particularly for this claim (the only source that has appeared to state PS4). As Inven does seem to be an english-language website that covers esports + similar in SE Asia, it would be of potentially great us if we treated it as reliable, but right now its not; I am going to check though with the VG group to see if we can. --MASEM (t) 13:23, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
  • A reliable source on the matter is available at this Kotaku page, who quotes the interview, including the PlayStation confirmation. Lordtobi (✉) 20:03, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
    @ThePowerofX and Masem: Given the Kotaku report, does it seem likely to be included in the article? Or better said, does anyone plan to include this? Lordtobi (✉) 20:19, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
    Honestly, I don't see why we removed it from the article in the first place. The entire Xbox conference was labeled as "console launch exclusive", despite the majority of games coming to PS4 (and PC) as well. Unless it has been announced since E3 that the PS4 version has been canceled, then it should probably be re-added to the article. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:23, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
  • There is no release date or hard plan for PS4 release. Basically this wikipedia page is lying and claiming that there is a PS4 version that may or may not ever exist. 66.193.18.10 (talk) 22:52, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
    If the producer for the game has said that a PS4 version is planned, we will assume it will be coming, until we are told otherwise or that it has obviously been cancelled (eg if it is 2025 and we're on PUBG 4 and there's no PS4 in sight for PUBG 1). We just need the source of his words that assures it is coming. --MASEM (t) 22:55, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
  • No no. It's an Xbox exclusive. Which means no ps4!!! Only Xbox. Watch E3 to confirm. Exclusive only mean one console for good. Get it right Matthewmcdonald2011 (talk) 08:34, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
    Examine the on screen text at the beginning of the announce video (34:28). It reads "console launch exclusive". Gamespot asked Phil Spencer about the meaning of this wording:
    Spencer explained to us that "console launch exclusive" is essentially synonymous with "timed exclusive," except with a bit more specificity. "Console launch exclusive means the first console the game will launch on will be Xbox One," he said. "I don't know, honestly, anything about when those games are going to launch on another platform."[6]
    The game is exclusive in the console space to Xbox in 2017, and will arrive on other platforms at a later point in time. — TPX 09:13, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Another interview with Chang Han Kim where he states much the same thing r.e. early access: Question: Are you a hard Xbox console exclusive for the foreseeable, or are you considering other platforms? Answer: So, we definitely do have plans and thoughts about other platforms… [7] — TPX 08:50, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
    • I blame Microsoft for this mess. They have never said it won't be coming to PS4 before or after E3, just that it's a "console launch exclusive" like literally everything else Microsoft showed at their conference. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:53, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 June 2017

In the "Design" section, the article states the following:

> Faster development was possible with the game engine Unreal Engine 4, compared with ARMA and H1Z1, which were built with proprietary game engines.

This is misleading, as Unreal is still a proprietary engine despite being free. 174.59.167.240 (talk) 23:01, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

That's basically what he states in the source though. Do you have an exact change to propose? The best I can think of is to add something like "the more widely used" to Unreal, and "non-public proprietary" to the other two, to include they aren't available. -- ferret (talk) 23:08, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

map size

the in game map is 25 square miles 64.170.21.194 (talk) 23:51, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

25 sq. miles = 5 miles x 5 miles = 8 km x 8km. We have it right. --MASEM (t) 00:00, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Should it be stated in parenthesis or something? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:02, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
We have the "convert" template giving "5 mi x 5 mi" right there. I don't think we need to spell that out as area. --MASEM (t) 00:11, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Right, but I'm asking if we could manually add 25 sq. miles instead of the automatic template outputting 5 mi x 5 mi. Or perhaps we could just have it read 8 square km instead, which is how its likely to be spoken more in common usage. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 02:55, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
I believe the current format of 8x8km is more accurate than 64km², as it outlines both dimensions without the need to state the map is a square. Lordtobi (✉) 11:38, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Also the conversion is required by MOSNUM. --MASEM (t) 12:24, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Fair enough. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:20, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Quick bit on sales

I know there's a few RS stories that have PUBG breaking 5 million sales based on Steam Spy data. Since Bluehole has offered its sales figures in the past, I am going to suggest we do not include the Steam Spy-based stories, since we have actual numbers from the publisher. If Bluehole never reported their figures, then this would have been fine, but that's not the case. --MASEM (t) 15:41, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

The usual caveat besides, SteamSpy is not sales figures. It is ownership estimates based on a sampling of Steam public profiles. -- ferret (talk) 15:53, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Not an MMO

@Masem: 100 is not a massive number of players compared to 64 which is common. Massively multiplayer online first-person shooter game give examples in the hundreds or thousands.

  • I sort of agree. Normally, an MMO doesn't have a player population cap on their servers, while PUBG is strictly limited to 100 per instance. Do the sources covering the game primarily describe it as an MMO? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:18, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
    • I can find numerous sources that call it an MMO through google news (Though I recommend you exclude "tera" from search results). The problem is that there is no hard definition of the limit between "multiplayer", and in fact, one market research company includes MOBAs in their category of MMO [8], because of the large semi-connected player base. It would be nice if there was a hard definition the size, but without it, the fact that many sites call it that seem to say we should keep that. Alternatively, we just leave it as a "battle royale for up to 100 players", the "multiplayer online game" being implicit in that. --MASEM (t) 22:38, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
      • I think the alternative suggestion is better, as it clearly states what it actually is, rather than just giving it a generic and potentially misleading MMO tag. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 23:29, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

On the paid cosmetic item debate

Right now there's debate/controversy in the PUBG community with the introduction of paid-for crates. I don't think we should include this at this time only because this seems like a bit of angry by players before they knew full details. However, there are sources for this, so if others think we should add it, its certainly possible. --MASEM (t) 15:14, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

A mix of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:LASTING seems to apply. In the grand history of things, if multiple reliable sources cover this, then we can add a short mention to development history or may be reception (history). Something like "at the time of announcement of paid whatever, a lot of players felt whatever". —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 15:53, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
If its covered by RS, then I'd add least mention it somewhere in the reception section. Just a single sentence or two would be enough. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:02, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:PUBG:_Battlegrounds/Archive_1&oldid=1086323057"