Talk:Saints Row (2022 video game)

"Saints Row (upcoming video game)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Saints Row (upcoming video game) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 12#Saints Row (upcoming video game) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 03:36, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Deleted Fan Backlash section

How are such websites as Forbes, The Gamer, Push Square, PlayStation Lifestyle, and even the Community Manager's own tweet labeling old school fans as "terrorists" not reliable sources?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8004:5160:C5C:1407:8958:783D:F5 (talk) 15:46, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

First, we do not cover players' reactions to games unless they are covered by reliable sources. Forbes contributor articles are not reliable, and the other sources are more opinion pieces and not discussing the player reaction. Only the PC Gamer is discussing negative fan reaction and that's only for the announcement and not the game. Basically, this is way too much details and inclusion of opinion that is not reflective of reliable sources, so we should omit it per WP:UNDUE. --Masem (t) 15:50, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Correction #1: all the websites above are reliable video game and or news websites. Correction #2: it's not a matter of opinion, the subject matter of all the articles I referenced are demonstrable facts. It is a demonstrable fact that the dialog is so cringe-worthy that Volition actually caved and removed some of it in their latest patch update. It is a demonstrable fact that the Volition suppressed such sexual humor as dildo bats, Rim Jobs, Freckle Bitches, and the ability to give the female player character ridiculously huge breasts. And it is a demonstrable fact that the Volition Community Manager regarded such negative feedback as "terrorist behavior" - her infamous Tweet is still up for all eyes to see. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8004:5160:C5C:1407:8958:783D:F5 (talk • contribs)

Within WP, we have to be very careful of how we present players' reactions to games, because gamers are often jaded with disparate opinions from the critics, but no sourcing readily picks up on these complaints. With the rebooted Saints Row, I'm having a hard time to see sources that get into the fan reaction, as the game itself was panned by regular critics. Certainly some articles were created, and Volition's response recognizes that there was mixed reaction to the game, but since that readily aligns with the critics' view, the amount of detail added is well beyond WP:UNDUE, particularly as the players' reaction aspect is not really discussed in all available sources in that much depth. --Masem (t) 16:52, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

I suggest you reevaluate the sources. The following sources specifically delve into fan reactions.

All three of Ryan Pearson's news article specifically cites several tweets and YouTube reviews from content creators who criticized the game. His article regarding the Boss Factory specifically cites video comparisons on YouTube demonstrating that the maximum breast size has been drastically reduced.

Zarmena Khan of PlayStation Lifestyle - a dedicated PlayStation news website - cites tweets posted by the Saints Row twitter account responding to the backlash.

Other articles such as those published by Tai Fabi, Mathew Byrd and Stacy Henley, while not citing any social media backlash specifically, perfectly report on the tonal shift in the game's story and the cringe-worthiness of everything the characters say and do.

These are all reputable news sources that can be found with a Google News search, and one way or another they all cite the negative feedback from fans or at the very least report such shared sentiments. 2001:8004:5160:C5C:D5F:5E01:EB78:8838 (talk) 03:13, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

References

Mention of "woke" criticism

@Marcus Markup Please can we discuss your recent edits. If you're desperate for the article to make a mention of the criticism of "wokeness" from fans, I've searched for reliable sources noting this and it seems there are more that do so before the game released, some of which are about the developer's response of "not backing down"; there's very few reviews (much less reliable ones) that mention wokeness, or in any great detail. As I say, wokeness was just one criticism among others that included the characters' design and the art style. Incidentally, you've written that reviews often referred to wokeness criticism but have only sourced one review, the other being an article that isn't a review as it was from before release.

It doesn't matter if people are going to the Reception section first looking for details about criticism if it isn't suited there. The only way the fan backlash to the trailer would warrant being moved to Reception is if the details about it was expanded into a full paragraph. As it is, I think a brief addition while keeping it in Development of criticism of wokeness and then a mention of the developer's response is sufficient, which could read as follows:

"The trailer was met with divided opinion on social media for not retaining the "feel" of prior series entries, including accusations of "wokeness". In response, Volition stated that they were "not backing down" on the game."

Let me know your thoughts. Wikibenboy94 (talk) 21:47, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

If you're desperate for the article to make a mention of the criticism of "wokeness" from fans... I don't appreciate having my edits being described as "desperation", particularly when those accusations could appear to others as projection. Saving the encyclopedia from ridicule is one of my goals as an editor, and having absolutely no mention of the well-documented subject controversy seemed to me to be on it's face ridiculous, and grounds for outsiders to question whether Wikipedia is actually fulfilling its mission as an encyclopedia; namely, as an objective documenter of basic fact. I have done my duty, but a man has to pick his fights in this world, and this one is not worth it. I'm taking this article off my watch list... peace out. Marcus Markup (talk) 22:00, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I have removed my edits. Have at it. I am no longer sure that saving the encyclopedia from ridicule in its coverage pertaining to socially loaded issues such as this should be a goal of mine. Marcus Markup (talk) 22:58, 12 August 2024 (UTC)