Talk:Sonic Boom: Rise of Lyric

Hardcore Gamer

In regards to this edit from Tezero:

• If the review is attributed to the magazine, it should be italicized.
• If the review is attributed to the website, it should not be italicized.

It doesn't really matter what the source started as, its what you're attributing this particular review to. Sergecross73 msg me 15:36, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough. It's not like WP:VG has a well-enforced convention one way or the other anyway; what I said was just how I last heard it explained. Tezero (talk) 15:38, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

I've attributed it more to the general MOS stuff, though I can't remember which WP abbreviation would take you there... Sergecross73 msg me 15:55, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Is the Japanese title important enough to be in the intro?

This is a game developed by an American studio primarily for the western market and published in that market first. The Japanese title can't be considered the "original" title in this case, as the Boom title ties in with the original/western name for the animated series (itself a French/American co-production). The only real claim the game has to "Japanese-ness" is that its publisher (though founded in the US) is run out of Japan. Is that enough of a reason for the Japanese title to be the second thing readers of the English language Wikipedia need to be told? It just doesn't seem like this game is a subject which is intrinsically Japanese. Vague | Rant 09:28, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

I'd agree if you were talking about the actual name of the article, but I don't think that warrants removal of a mere mention of it. If anything, I think it should be mentioned, considering its not just the direct Japanese equivalent of Sonic Boom, but something else (Sonic Toon). Sergecross73 msg me 18:41, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Playing devil's advocate here, but what's so special about the Japanese title just because it's different? The title for Ice Age: Continental Drift in Japan is "アイス・エイジ4/パイレーツ大冒険" (Ice Age 4: Pirates' Big Adventure), and I don't have to check our article on the film to know that isn't mentioned once. Tezero (talk) 18:55, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

That's just a reason why I felt it was a bit noteworthy. Ultimately, I think it should be kept because its still a Japanese franchise from a Japanese publisher. (And with how quickly/vigorously editors always add the Japanese names to all the JRPG articles I create, I think we'll probably need a strong reason, or lots of maintenance, to keep it out of the article. Not sure either is worth the effort.) Sergecross73 msg me 20:38, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm not against the Japanese title being given in the article, I'm just not sure it belongs in the intro. The development section already mentions that the game was originally not planned for Japanese release at all (again, kind of supporting the lack of intro importance) but that it was eventually announced for Japan under the Sonic Toon branding. This seems like the perfect place to give the Japanese title in full rather than right at the beginning where it seems to be getting undue attention. Vague | Rant 13:32, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2014

There's another studio that co-developed the game with BigRedButton, called IllFonic. Their logo can be seen before the game's title screen appears.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9_zPplYqXY&feature=youtu.be&t=29s

2A01:E34:EE2B:F80:C4E7:E54D:5E55:AE22 (talk) 10:28, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Done –Davey2010 • (talk) 16:34, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Reviews

How long should we be waiting before writing a full Reception section? Unlike with Shattered Crystal, there's plenty to say with what's been written already, but reviews from major sites are probably still incoming. A week, maybe? Tezero (talk) 23:55, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Whenever someone feels like doing it. There's no reason it can't be done as they come in... Sergecross73 msg me 00:50, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

"List of games notable for negative reception" and its wording here

Alright, so there seems to be disagreement on how to handle this. Right now, this game is included on List of video games notable for negative reception, and rightfully so, it meets all of the criteria. But there seems to be disagreement on how to handle that here, with editors adding a wiki-link to the page with the visible text of "worst games of all time". And maybe rightfully so; yes, it belongs on that list, but honestly, there may be hundreds others that should too. And it give no context as to why its the worst. (I know what it means - negative reception. But the given text doesn't say that.) The current wording may not be the best.

My suggestion: link to the "List of video games notable for negative reception", but change the wording to something a little less strong. Maybe something like "was received extremely negatively by critics" or something like that. Thoughts? Sergecross73 msg me 21:33, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

That's fine with me. I wouldn't support simply saying that it "is classified" as one of the worst games ever unless at least one independent sources says that it is widely thought to be; even a source saying that it thinks the game is one of the worst wouldn't be enough. Also, it's worth noting that a game doesn't have to be categorized as one of the worst ever to be notable for its negative reception - not that this would or should count as a reliable source, but TVTropes has a trope called "8.8" about games that, despite getting very positive reviews, became infamous for not getting absolutely stellar ones. Tezero (talk) 23:29, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

I think the problem is that its basically the video game equivalent of List of music considered the worst or List of films considered the worst, but was named as such as to differentiate itself from games that were considered the worst for "moral reasons" like GTA or Doom, which are criticized for violence, but get generally good reviews. Also, I've noticed that the current, harsh wording of "worst games of all time" is used across a number of the video games on the the list, but in general, its usually true with those games. (E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (video game), Bubsy 3D, etc) Its just not necessarily something that should be said about everything on the list, like this game. (Yet?) Sergecross73 msg me 14:07, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Vandalism

In regards to Reception header currently. Noticed an obviously vandalized Reception section, then checked history to see a recurring pattern on this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.250.13.64 (talk) 06:57, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Image

Sergecross73: Yes, I am looking at the right image, and I have played Sonic games since shortly after being born. I can promise you, the order you reverted my edit to contain is incorrect; Sonic is famously a blue hedgehog, Knuckles is red, Tails is yellow, Amy is pink. The images on their Wikipedia pages should confirm this or failing that the images on my old haunt, the Sonic News Network, should confirm this.--Launchballer 16:39, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

To be clear, we're talking about this image.

The old/current version says Sticks, Knuckles, Sonic, Amy, and Tails. This is correct.

Your changed version version says Tails, Sonic, Amy, and Knuckles. This is incorrect, and even omits a character.

This is why I wondered if you were looking at the correct image... Sergecross73 msg me 16:57, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Strangely, at the moment it says "upright=1.2"; removing ".2" changes it to the image you cite. The order I had was correct for the image I was seeing.--Launchballer 17:36, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

"Sonic Synergy" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Sonic Synergy. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:03, 30 January 2020 (UTC)