Template talk:Infobox video game/GameSeries

preceded and followed

Following the examples in the film and book infoboxes, I've added {{{preceded by}}} and {{{followed by}}} to this template. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:05, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

See the main Final Fantasy game articles for examples of how they are used. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:22, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Preceded by/followed by out of control

This should not be used for non-direct sequels (e.g. someone put that Super Mario 64 was preceded by Super Mario Land 2). If it's going to be used at all, it should only be used for direct sequels - Game to Game 2. I think it's a silly idea overall - does anyone agree with me? It doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Andre (talk) 03:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

These parameters should be removed, which seems to be the consensus of the "Out of hand?" discussion previously. --Mrwojo 04:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh. I'm going to remove them, then. Andre (talk) 18:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Rather than remove it we should clearly define it's usage. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 11:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I strongly support the proposal to return the "preceded by/followed by" parameter. I think it was great idea, just that it needed a bit of explanation how to use it correctly. --Koveras 10:24, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree - return it. There are many games part of a series with direct sequels. A sequel should be defined as the following game which continues the plot of the first game (examples are Longest Journey series, Simon the Sorceror series, Monkey Island series). Burns flipper 07:46, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I have no strong feelings towards this field except for being very slightly anti it on two counts. Series games tend to have a "(game name) series" article that states the order of the games.The other reason is a worry over the ever expanding info-box. But as I say no strong feeling either way. But I still think there should be an optional expansion pack field though. - X201 08:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Optional, but definedly yes; define it's usage and it'll make things more easy to see (and easy to navigate). Jeroen Stout 06:37, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

It's not happening (this is something like the fifth time this discussion has been held, and this particular thread is months old to boot). We have the series parameter for this, and worst-case you can use a navbox. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

preceded_by and followed_by fields?

Are there any objections to the addition of these fields, similar to those used on {{Infobox Book}} and {{Infobox Film}}? There are a large number of game series where this could be useful (Doom/Quake/Halo etc) QmunkE 11:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Those articles already have navboxes at the bottom with the entire series. I don't see the need to clutter the already large infobox with these fields. Pagrashtak 17:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

As Pagra said, most games that are part of a series have got their own navbox on the article page as is. Also the Infobox is supposed to be a quick reference, it's getting harder and harder to pick out the info from it as more and more fields of a non-vital nature are added. - X201 09:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I do think, however, that with the rise of episodic games this could be a welcome addition and welcome for quick navigation. You have a point about clutering, but I do think that Half Life²: Episode Two is very well linked with episodes one and three. It is not merely just in a series, it is almost continuous gameplay between episodes. Same for games like the new Sam&Max series. I just see it the same as tv-series here. It could still be optional.Jeroen Stout 23:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I would agree that this would be a useful inclusion - I can't see how people are complaining about cluttering, as this box is already a lot emptier than many others, for example TV show infoboxes. If there are no objections soon, I'll go ahead and add it. _TheIslander 17:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Removal of the preceded by/ followed by parameters?

I noticed in this this edit that these parameters were removed. Why? They were very useful. Fistful of Questions 23:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I was just coming here to post that very question. Seems counter-productive and makes the infobox less informative. -- Y|yukichigai (_ramble argue ^check) 02:36, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

It was removed because it was getting way out of control, mainly people listing games that weren't direct sequels or not even sequels at all but just joined by the same character. The best way out of it was removal of Preceded/Followed by and to use the Series field instead to point readers to "series" articles about a whole game series which would provide context for any half or spiritual sequels rather than directing readers to a single article out of context. - X201 14:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

I can understand the issue, but the obvious solution is not to remove useful functionality from a template, but to remove the non-sequel entries in the individual articles. Many users like to include improper fair-use images in articles, but that doesn't mean we should make the [[Image]] tags only work for commons images. I'm going to ask to restore the functionality. I would suggest putting a warning about irrelevant non-sequel games in the template documentation. -- Y|yukichigai (_ramble argue ^check) 21:07, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Discuss this among the relevant WikiProject first. The comments here are nine months apart. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:58, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Preceded By and Folowed By

I think preceded by and folowed by should be on the template. So then you could put the game before it and the game after it in the series.  wwesocks  02:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Support. That would be a good idea. Salavat (talk) 03:34, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I think we got rid of it at some stage in the past as game sequels, expansions, add-ons, spin-offs, etc aren't usually as clear cut as a simple "preceded by, followed by" arrangement. -- Sabre (talk) 15:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I oppose because it gets either too complex as S@bre points out, or it's entirely trivial, e.g. Game X is followed by Game X2, followed by Game X3, etc. Not a particularly meaningful thing to have. Ham Pastrami (talk) 19:45, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Last Game, This Game, Next Game

Is it possible to add Last Game, This Game and Next Game options (in the same manner as Template:Infobox Album) to allow linking games in a series? -- JediLofty ^User_Talk 09:25, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Most video game series already have a series navigation box at the bottom of the article that already does this. I can't wait for the "This game was released after that one" "Ah but its a prequel so it comes before that.." arguments to start. - X201 (talk) 09:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, navboxes are better for this purpose because the order of games in a series is often not linear: unlike albums, video games often have spin-offs. Kariteh (talk) 12:00, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Preceded By and Followed by

I would like a "preceded by" and a "Followed by" parameter added to the infobox like in the film infobox. I would do it but I don't know a thing about editing infoboxes (not to mention that the infobox is locked). Americanfreedom (talk) 03:52, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

This has come up before, and determine not to be a good idea. For a series like Zelda, do we catalog these in release order or in-game chronological order? What do we do for expansions and add-ons? Basically, it will raise too many arguments. A game with at least 3 titles should have a navbox at the bottom of the article to help find the next games in the series. --MASEM 03:55, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

See #Last Game, This Game, Next Game. Kariteh (talk) 07:42, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe a special page in the Talk archive (with copies of previous discussions) should be created just for this topic? SharkD (talk) 08:25, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Addition of 'Preceded by' and 'Followed by'

I think it would be useful to add these fields to the template as they would allow the reader to quickly see where in a series a particular game lies. For example Grand Theft Auto: Vice City would show Preceded by: Grand Theft Auto III and Followed by: Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 20:40, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Just spotted a similar discussion above. In response to X201's comment, The same applies to television programmes such as 24 but the articles relating to specific seasons include similar information in the infobox. I think it would be beneficial to have the same information available for video games. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 20:43, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, see here. SharkD (talk) 01:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Oppose as I always do when this comes up. Pagrashtak 05:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. It can easily present a wrong idea in cases where a series of games is not an actual chronological order. Also such a subject can just as easily be covered by the article itself.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 09:49, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Not to mention this should be covered in the prose of the article. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 12:51, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the others, many game series have erratic time lines. With sequels, prequels, midquels, and spin-offs, there are too many ways to interpret preceded and followed. For instance, how would this be applied to the Final Fantasy series? By release dates, Dirge of Cerberus: Final Fantasy VII is followed by Final Fantasy XII, while story-wise something like the Devil May Cry series is 3, 1, 4, 2. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 16:17, 10 September 2008 (UTC))

I'd have to weakly oppose this, as unlike the more clear-cut nature of television or game show series, most video game franchises (e.g. Final Fantasy) are not is any neat order. It may confuse the reader, first off, and then there might be some potentially ugly edit warring over having such a box in the first place and/or what precedes or proceeds a game. MuZemike (talk) 18:07, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

TV shows aren't necessarily any better. See Caprica (TV series), not to mention all the flashback webisodes/straight-to-DVD movies in the BSG series. SharkD (talk) 02:22, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Add series next and past

In a videogame serie we should add whic comes before and after, like:

|series = The Legend of Zelda |past = A Link to the Past |next = Ocarina of Time

What do you think? Can somebody add this? OboeCrack (talk) 11:11, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

This has been discussed many times 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6--SkyWalker (talk) 11:42, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Sequel / predecessor

Since a lot of games (in fact: countless) have a sequel and/or predecessor (right word?), it may a good idea to add those lines to this template.
An example is given in Template:Infobox Film, like Shrek 2.
In its template on its article, it says:

Preceded by Shrek

Followed by Shrek the Third

Examples of video games with sequels and predecessors are The Sims 1-3, GTA 1-4, almost all of them! I think it's right to remain the series articles, but it wouldn't be of much costs to add those lines, right? And it would be very informative on the games articles. Maybe it would even be wise, to create a bot for all games in %game name% (series) to add the info.
Dr. F.C. Turner - [USERPAGE|USERTALK] - 11:00, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, read above. BUT: a lot people DO want this. It's just that it MAY run out of hand. We should treat that, then. Not by not creating this, in my honest opinion. Dr. F.C. Turner - [USERPAGE|USERTALK] - 11:03, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

"Preceded by" and "Followed by" fields?

Can we have these fields added to the template? They would be applicable to many if not most video games, and would allow for convenient access to any previous or successive game on any game article. — CIS ^(talk | stalk) 01:12, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Been proposed many times and each time we don't add it. Do we add these chronologically? By release date? By "official" series releases? There's so many different ways of interpreting what the "next" or "previous" game in a series that we will otherwise constantly fight over these fields. --MASEM (t) 07:50, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Masem. His concerns were the first that came to my mind upon reading the suggestion. Taking remakes, spin-offs and things like non-notable mobile games into the equation, this will just cause edit wars and constant debates. Prime Blue (talk) 21:00, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I think this has been proposed before too many times. The problem was and is the ambiguity of this - spin-offs, non-canons, etc. For every clear case, there will be 10 unclear. This belongs in prose, instalments, or see also. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:24, 5 August 2010 (UTC)