Talk:Mario Strikers: Battle League

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Nintendo task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Jackpot World (1 participant)
Bejeweled Stars (5 participants)
Melee (game terminology) (5 participants)
Godzilla: Monster of Monsters (4 participants; relisted)
Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (4 participants; relisted)
Crazy Bus (13 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Sources

Sergecross73 msg me 15:39, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About those VentureBeat and Gematsu articles

Hello there, apologies for that previous edit, you are right that Wikipedia goes by what reliable sources say. Though I must insist that something is off about the info those two articles give regarding the developer.

For starters, the VentureBeat and Gematsu articles were respectively written at precisely 2:10 p.m. and 2:08 p.m. EST, which is about four and two minutes after the game was announced, respectively; this is a fact because the event began to be broadcast at 2:00 p.m.^[1] I bring this up because it is worth considering when exactly these articles were written to verify their validity. The fact that they were written so soon after the announcement means that they are going off of information from the presentation itself (WP:CONTEXTMATTERS).

Now, with that out of the way, it begs the question, where did they get the info that Next Level Games is the developer? If we look at the official website, the developer is also not listed there, so it is impossible for these sources to know who the developer was since: the announcement didn't mention it, and neither does the official website (not to mention that the articles themselves haven't been updated since they were first published).

Furthermore, in this case I would think that the info regarding the publisher and developer from the official website takes precedence to any info provided by any of these articles. Alt (talk) 23:13, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The writers are both Jeff Grub and Sal Romano, and they're both very connected in the industry, they are both the type to have inside information. Sergecross73 msg me 23:45, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I want to make it clear that I strongly believe Next Level Games are indeed the developers of this game, but for this particular case, I think we should wait for an official source from Nintendo to reveal the developer. Alt (talk) 23:47, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We don't require first party confirmation, and we don't require our require our reliable sources to show their sources. Sergecross73 msg me 23:51, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sure, but WP:VG/S does mention that "content must be verifiable". In this case, the information regarding the publisher and developer that is shown in the official website is reliable (WP:SOURCE). There's also this regarding verifiability: "If reliable sources disagree, then maintain a neutral point of view and present what the various sources say, giving each side its due weight." The lack of a developer being mentioned in the official website is still noteworthy. Alt (talk) 23:58, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, the "verifiable" is referring to VB or Gematsu in this case. We need sources to verify. We don't need to verify the sources's sources are reliable. Sergecross73 msg me 00:17, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, we've now got this and this now also stating Next Level Games. While the latter source isn't generally considered usable in Wikipedia, it does appear to outline things correctly. Sergecross73 msg me 20:53, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I only just saw these. This is the kind of confirmation I was waiting for. I added the NWR article as a source as well as a Nintendo Life one. I was wondering, could we remove the VentureBeat and Gematsu citations and leave only the NWR and NL ones? It's just that four citations for who is developing the game seems excessive to me, and the first two aren't particularly focused on the developer of the game while the NWR and NL reports are. No big deal if we leave them there anyways. Alt (talk) 14:25, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, 4 would generally be considered a bit excessive. It wouldn't hurt to keep for the short-term, since there has been some confusion on the matter, but we can probably trim some out down the line. Sergecross73 msg me 14:59, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "Watch: Nintendo Direct February 2022 - Live!". Nintendo Life. 9 February 2022.

4 vs CPU

Does anyone know if this will support humans vs CPU!? 2A02:C7F:2CBF:8C00:D918:A03D:65EB:5665 (talk) 18:43, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe it's been outright stated, so it can't be mentioned in the article, but I can't recall the last multiplayer sports game that didn't allow for that, realistically speaking. Sergecross73 msg me 20:18, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Soccer/football

An IP keeps changing this. Either are acceptable, so we generally stick with what the article was created with, per MOS:RETAIN. Sergecross73 msg me 20:32, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

World usage is football, is what the sport is usually called. This isn't the only Mario Strikers game that use "football" in its name ("Mario Smash Football" and "Mario Strikers Charged Football"), plus this one being called "Battle League Football" outside North America is proof of that. So since either is acceptable then my opinion is that we should use "football video game", plus is the most popular way to call the sport, a world usage thing, not just something used in one region.

Now, many football video games here in wikipedia use the full name "Association football" to describe the sport/sub-genre, so my last edit was based on that. I'm ok with either "football" or the full name "association football" which I think is good to avoid any kind of bias.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27_aDc7Rwoc

https://www.nintendo.co.uk/Games/Nintendo-Switch-games/Mario-Strikers-Battle-League-Football-2169139.html

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EFootball

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_association_football_video_games 190.21.50.38 (talk) 23:16, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's no "bias", I merely picked one to write the article, and I'm enfircing MOS:RETAIN so that we don't have people switching it on the hour every time someone wants to switch it to their given preference. There are wiki-links that explain what "Soccer" is for anyone who may not know what it is, and I'm not even opposed to explaining in the lead. But to change it wholesale flies in the face of RETAIN. And a number of your changes are sloppy/flawed anyways. For instance, you keep changing it from "soccer ball" to "football ball". Sergecross73 msg me 23:26, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not referring to you when I said "bias", that can apply to anyone that wants to pick a version they like. Still you should have done a better investigation first though, since football/soccer video games are under the "List of association football video games" sub-genre, so this game shouldn't be an exception. By the way "football ball" isn't flawed, you can call it that way or just "football" see: Ball (association football) 190.21.50.38 (talk) 00:13, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll concede that I didnt notice that virtually all articles seem to use association football instead. I won't remove it further, though I did add soccer (without removing football) on first mention for clarity and to hopefully cut down on future edit wars on it. I also just changed "football ball" to just "ball" - the ball used in these games are usually nothing like a regulation ball, so it probably didn't need the link to begin with. There's WP:OVERLINK too. Sergecross73 msg me 14:37, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really see the need to add "soccer" there, every single association football game just use "association football video game" without adding soccer since the association football page already mention football and soccer in the lead, and no one is complaining or creating a edit war about that in association football video games related articles, it doesn't need clarification. Honestly it just being "association football video game" was enough. And about the ball, I'm ok with no using football ball/soccer ball, since we can add a link to the ball page like: ball and will be perfectly clear. 190.21.50.38 (talk) 20:32, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I don't think you understand how much typical back and forth there is on this sort of thing. This is going to be a major release on a major video game platform. It's going to get a lot of traffic and it's best to future-proof things like this a bit. Sergecross73 msg me 20:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand it very well, so don't get me wrong, that's the reason we've got admins like you to deal with this sort of stuff, and at the end of the day people use what is best (sometimes within a consensus) which in this case is "association football video game". The only thing I see it's you wanting your preferred version for the article, since this is the only football video game where "soccer" is being added here in the whole wikipedia. You said this will be a major release, but I'm not sure if you know that bigger games like FIFA or Pro Evolution Soccer (now called "efootball") don't use soccer to describe those games, it's just either "football" or "association football" and no one is having a problem with that, it's just you, again, wanting things your way, especially because you created the page, but you should know sometimes you might be wrong, and, in this particular case, you are. 190.21.50.38 (talk) 20:37, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to assume good faith - I just told you what I'm trying to do - future proofing to cut down on future disputes. You may want to familiarize yourself with WP:OSE. I don't edit any FIFA articles and cannot attest to what has or hasn't worked there. I'm just saying WP:ENGVAR issues are a constant issue on many articles I do maintain. It's also strange to me for you to accuse me of insisting on having it my way, when I've already conceded some of your points and am trying to meet you half way, while you meanwhile concede nothing. Sergecross73 msg me 20:47, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It won't create any dispute, every football video game article is under: List of association football video games, in the same way every fighting video game is under: List of fighting video games.

Honestly, it looks like you want it your way, since you want to add soccer here no matter what, when is not needed or used for football video games. It's not about "concede" in this case, it's more about what is the right thing to do. Football video games are under the "association football video games" sub-genre, not "association football/soccer video games", and you don't want to use that here claiming it will create a dispute. Why don't give it a chance instead? The association football page already mentions "football" and "soccer" so it's very clear. And btw I did concede the football ball > ball change thing, which I thought was a good change like you explained above. Now, let's use "association football video game" and see what happen, I promise I won't continue with this back and forth if we give it a chance, like every other football video game article here. 190.21.50.38 (talk) 21:39, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you're accusing the person who wants to include both terms of POV pushing. It makes no sense. Sergecross73 msg me 21:49, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The way you keep insisting about soccer here after I showed you proof and talked a lot about it just shows you don't want to concede over a thing we won't even be arguing, that doesn't make sense.

It doesn't make sense to add soccer there when the sub-genre is already defined, or are you also suggesting we should edit every football video game page now to push POV? You are not giving any valid reason now, the sub-genre it's defined and very clear. 190.21.50.38 (talk) 22:06, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read WP:OSE yet? Sergecross73 msg me 22:16, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know what consistency is? 190.21.50.38 (talk) 23:29, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do. Your turn. Do you understand OSE? Sergecross73 msg me 00:22, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I read it. Now you. Why don't we use "association football video game" sub-genre without adds? You said you know what consistency is, not seeing that here. You even edited the page adding soccer saying "per talk page" when we haven't finished here. I'm sure if you create a vote here most people will probably agree to just add the sub-genre without unnecessary stuff. 190.21.60.48 (talk) 23:35, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain your understanding of OSE. You haven't said a single thing that indicates you understand the concept. Sergecross73 msg me 00:49, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Daisy's absence

Recently, fans of the original two games are not happy that Daisy, who appeared in the previous two games, is not in Battle League, so can you find any reliable sources about fans demanding for Daisy to be added in Battle League?--24.44.76.188 (talk) 17:33, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seems a bit early to be upset about this when the games not even out yet. She could still be unlockable or DLC. Sergecross73 msg me 18:19, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reception page

Hi,

Shouldn't there be a reception page by now, considering it's been 2-3 days since release and there are a lot of reviews should we make a reception page, although I am bad at making the review page for metacritic and individual scores. 193.114.122.175 (talk) 00:24, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's just that no one's done it yet. I'll probably start something up soon. Sergecross73 msg me 01:14, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The question nobody talks about

Why is there Mario Kart 8 voices in Mario Strikers Battle League, and why not voices from previous Mario Strikers installments? 93.171.13.145 (talk) 08:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We write Wikipedia according to what reliable sources say, and no reliable sources have discussed this. Not sure why they would either. There's nothing of interest here. Who cares if they recycled voice acting across games with almost no voice acting? They hardly talk in complete sentences in these games. It's all catch phrases and grunts and cheers and whatnot. It's a complete non-issue. Sergecross73 msg me 12:53, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There were some people who care about voicelines. Edward Saba VO said on Twitter that future spin-off games shouldn't constantly re-use Mario Kart Wii and 8 voices. So the question had to be added because of which. 178.35.232.66 (talk) 14:40, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what Wikipedia is talking about when we're talking about reliable sources. Come back when staff from websites like IGN or Eurogamer are discussing. Social media chatter needs to stay on social media. Sergecross73 msg me 14:50, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] "Watch: Nintendo Direct February 2022 - Live!". Nintendo Life. 9 February 2022.

[1]