Talk:Volition (company)

Copyright problem removed

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://www.mobygames.com/company/volition-inc. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:32, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Volition, Inc. vs. Deep Silver Volition, LLC.?

Hey, just wanted to say, wouldn't we need to change the full legal name of the company? Since they were bought out by Koch Media, their name has changed from Volition, Inc. to Deep Silver Volition, LLC. as stated on their official website. Would we not need to change this in the article? --94.170.227.166 (talk) 16:23, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Probably not, they'll probably continue to release games as Volition, Inc., and besides, the Ubisoft article isn't named Ubisoft Inc., the Coca-Cola Company article The Coca-Cola Company Ltd. etc. despite those being the full legal names. This is only named as Volition, Inc. as that's what they release games as, rather than just Volition. 83.100.233.169 (talk) 10:46, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

I know that but like shouldn't be at least mention it at the start of the article such as Deep Silver Volition, LLC. dba Volition Inc. etc. I dunno. --94.170.227.166 (talk) 15:53, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

move back to Volition, Inc.

i'd like to propose we move this back to "Volition, Inc.".

• Volition will still be releasing games under the "Volition, Inc." moniker

• Once moved back, the "(video game studio)" portion of the title will become quite unnecessary as there are no other Volition, Inc.s that it can be confused with

- 83.100.233.169 (talk) 15:03, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

The company legal name is now Deep Silver Volition LLC, so the article title would just be wrong if it was moved back. Zero Serenity (talk) 16:34, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Then why's it not named that explicity? They're still using the moniker of V, Inc. anyway. So if we're not using V, Inc., which is what they're still releasing games as, it should be the actual company name, i.e. the one you specified. - 83.100.233.169 (talk) 19:58, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Because Deep Silver Volition LLC doesn't make for a good article title and it would spark confusion. This is why things like Nintendo aren't Nintendo Corporation as their article title. Volition is the common name for the studio. Zero Serenity (talk) 13:11, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

EA is the common name for Electronic Arts, yet the article is named Electronic Arts. And in that case ", Inc." isn't used since EA release games as EA not EA, Inc. unlike Volition. - 83.100.233.169 (talk) 15:11, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

I think a good compromise would be to have the Article name itself as "Volition, Inc." but have the top of the infobox and the start of the article as "Deep Silver Volition LLC." Maybe explain the name change somewhere in the article? --94.170.227.166 (talk) 02:20, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. Unless someone disagrees, can someone do this please? - 83.100.233.169 (talk) 06:10, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Employees

Hey @Lordtobi:, my point was that the red triangle pointed downward meaning a decrease of the number of employees says nothing without knowing what the number of employees was before. Maybe it's the mobile view, but I don't see any way of knowing what the previous number is. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 16:14, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, no it's not a rendering issue, there is no previous number present, because we don't know or might not know how many people they formerly employed. However, the sources used to gain the number talk about layoffs, hence we can verifiably say that they were less than before. Hope this helps. Lordtobi (✉) 17:08, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Outrage Games

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.

---

Outrage Games (a.k.a. Outrage Entertainment) was a video game developer that is notable for only a single event: having developed the critically acclaimed Descent 3. Probably best to merge the contents of this article (including the logo, which arguably does not meet the threshold of originality and if so is thus in the public domain) into the article about a company that created the FreeSpace games. Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ 21:48, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

• Agree that the company is not notable; while it is known for more than just one event (two notable games), it still fails WP:NCORP and I don't think it can be expanded greatly beyond what it currently is, as it was rather short-lived and not very popular. However, merging this here (which I assume includes merging the game tables to List of Volition games) probably does not make that much sense, as the companies are barely related except for resulting from the same split. That said, since the Parallax split is covered at lengths in this article, relevant aspects between the two companies' relations are already covered. I also included Outrage's minor relations (THQ acquisition + closure, developer of Xbox and Windows ports for Red Faction II). This only leaves mentions of Alter Echo and the canceled Rubu Tribe, which I cannot envision fitting anywhere here. Lordtobi (✉) 22:56, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Possibly a better merge target would be Descent 3. Lordtobi (✉) 23:23, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Also note rarding the logo (since you mentioned it): I changed it to a more modern (end-of-2003-modern) version in SVG vector format. This image is even simpler than the previous one and I do think that it qualifies for Commons, but that should be decided not in relation with this discussion. Lordtobi (✉) 23:26, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

@Lordtobi, that merge is right off the bat but then needs a section. Benjaminkirsc (talk) 23:25, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I agree that Outrage Games should be merged with Volition due to having the same Parent Company at the time THQ 72.228.153.194 (talk) 03:52, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

I would like to re-iterate that having the same parent company is not enough reason to entirely merge two articles; THQ had so many studios and Outrage was merely one in the masses. Everything where the two companies' histories crossed streams (split, Descent 3, THQ acquisition) is already mentioned. The rest of what Outrage covers (Alter Echo, Rubu Tribe) simply does not fit here withiout akwardly adding a contextless section.

@Gamingforfun365: This discussion has been open for half a year now and should be closed. If the notabiliy issue for Outrage persists, it should be taken to AfD instead. Lordtobi (✉) 09:39, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

After reviewing the article and that the situation had yet to resolve, I have redirected it to Descent 3. I have also reviewed the file containing the company logo, and determined that it is too simple to be copyrighted and thereby in the public domain. I thought you would like to hear the latter, but the reason for the former is that I have seen no opposition to redirecting the page, although it was suggested that it be Descent 3 instead of Volition, so I moved it to that. GaɱingFørFuɲ³⁶⁵ 07:18, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

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.

Is there a source for Parallax *becoming* Volition? I think large parts of this article may be in error.

As far as I'm aware, remembering some old discussions on the Overload forums from the founders, Parallax never went away or turned into Volition, but still exists as a holding company for Descent IP, jointly owned by Kulas and Toschlog. The reason Descent Underground was never able to use the Descent setting, characters, history etc. was because Interplay, despite controlling the trademark, didn't have rights to them.

I don't believe Parallax became Volition any more than it became Outrage. All three are/were separate entities I believe. Where is the source for this Parallax becoming Volition stuff? Hurleybird (talk) 02:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

It is in the Game Informer video. I don't recall exactly which timestamp, but the Parallax -> Volition transition is characterized as a rebranding, whereas Outrage was a new establishment. You are technically correct that Parallax still exists, but it only does so on paper. Volition, Inc. also coexisted with Deep Silver Volition, LLC for some before being dissolved on paper.

Currently, the article notes that "Formally, Volition was founded in October 1996 with twelve members", although the company has since adopted 1993 as its founding year. Whether we should split Parallax and Volition at October 1996 may be a matter of discussion. IceWelder [✉] 09:34, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

If that's correct, then Parallax never became Volition in any formal way. Parallax becoming Volition (far after the fact) in the hearts and minds of Volition employees does not make it so, especially when Parallax still legally exists. While this attitude is understandable and noteable, it is an error to present it as the factual reality when the actual factual reality is otherwise. Hurleybird (talk) 23:58, 1 September 2023 (UTC)