Talk:Fez (video game)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Not NPOV

This article seems like its written by Phil Fish himself.--206.248.71.225 (talk) 07:58, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


vandalism

it seems Nahum Reduta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nahum_Reduta) is vandalizing this article by constantly removing factual information, can someone with more authority get this sorted — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.84.248.216 (talk) 08:22, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

  • The website thebestgamers.net, which appears to be created solely for the purpose of qualifying as a "valid source", is being used as edit war material by an IP-hopping vandal. User(s) have been repeatedly warned and page protection has been requested. — Nahum Reduta [talk|contribs] 08:34, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
    • Anything further on its protection status? ahref (talk) 02:01, 29 April 2012 (UTC)


  • "The website thebestgamers.net, which appears to be created solely for the purpose of qualifying as a "valid source"" You are wrong Nahum Reduta, thebestgamers.net is a game review site. It wasn't created for the sole purpose of a valid source.--206.248.71.225 (talk) 16:25, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Changing from "Start" to "B"

I upgraded this article to "B" class. It may not be perfect, but it looks at least "mostly complete and without major problems". If anything, maybe it could stand some sources that aren't video game blogs, like http://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/movies/2013/05/25/new-dimensions-emerge-video-game-fez/xiVRLcMjQSfqefurrSpX5K/story.html. I don't know if the NPOV accusations are current since there were no specifics given, but the tone looks encyclopedic enough to me. —Mu Mind (talk) 22:40, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

More Vandalism

Phil Fish's name is listed as "Phil Cod", please fix. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TikanXZK (talk • contribs) 04:58, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, I've fixed it. --MASEM (t) 06:05, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Release on other platforms

There's a lot of rumour and speculation about which platforms Fez will be released for, without any real evidence. For example, there was a sentence claiming that Fez is being ported to Linux and OS X, yet the article linked to makes no mention of this. It does not necessarily follow that a Steam release to the PC will necessarily be ported to other operating systems that run Steam (e.g. OS X and Linux). In fact, only a tiny minority of Steam games have cross-platform availability. Please can we keep this article to known facts? M0thr4 (talk) 20:52, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Phil Fish stated that Fez is being ported to Linux and OS X in a Reddit post several months ago. Polytron has confirmed that recent drama has not altered porting plans. --98.88.82.238 (talk) 05:59, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Marcus Beer (annoyed gamer) "incident"

In the section on the FEZ II cancellation, there is a strong suggestion that "Annoyed Gamer"'s remarks were at least part of the cause for the cancellation. This is then followed by "however, it was made clear [by Fish] that..." this was not the sole reason. All in all this part is awkward; I would propose that we stick to the facts and leave out the annoyed gamer part. Once we have reliable secondary sources (and once this is no longer such a "current issue") there might be enough material to add back some part of "annoyed gamer". I shied away from simply removing it because that move might be controversial. What do other editors think? Nczempin (talk) 07:18, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

It is a fact that many in the press believed it was the "Annoyed Gamer" remarks were the/a trigger for Fish. Whether they were really the/a trigger for Fish, only Fish can answer but its impossible to talk about the suddenness of the cancellation without mentioning that hours before there was this noted argument between Fish and "Annoyed Gamer". I'll check the language to make sure its clear that it is a press opinion and not necessarily Fish's. --MASEM (t) 14:24, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Why isn't there any discussion in the section about the online pushback and criticism of Fish that occurred after he told Marcus to go kill himself in their Twitter argument? SilverserenC 21:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Voxels and Trixels

Maybe it would be of interest to check the developer perspective from this article and refer to the Voxels article which I noticed doesn't have Fez in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kacex (talk • contribs) 20:21, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Fez language

I think that the alternate alphabet included in fez should be included in this article. http://www.ign.com/wikis/fez/Code_Solutions Any suggestions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RETheUgly (talk • contribs) 22:07, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, to start, is the alphabet covered enough in reliable sources so as to warrant its inclusion? czar ♔ 02:18, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Nebulus as inspiration

I just undid an edit that mentioned Nebulus as a source of inspiration for Fez, which included this link as a citation: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-12-fez-review . I just wanted to give a brief explanation for the revert: The Eurogamer review mentions Nebulus (aka Tower Toppler) for purposes of presentation, but to my knowledge this is the only review that mentions this game. Phil Fish has done numerous interviews and figured prominently in a documentary about indie games, and while he's mentioned many specific sources of inspiration, he's never mentioned Nebulus (to my knowledge). So the fact that it comes up in the review makes this the reviewer's opinion about a similarity (that reviewer also mentions 2001: A Space Odyssey and a few other unrelated things), but not actually a source of inspiration for the game. We'll need a citation from an interview with the developer to back that one up, and I don't think there's really much of a place for Nebulus in the Reception section either (reviewers drawing similarities to other games is rarely notable).

Hope this helps. :) — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:43, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

What DOES he cite as his inspiration? Honestly, this game looks almost verbatim copied from an ArmorGames flash game called Sky Island that came out like 3 years ago.

--||bass (talk) 23:35, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Merge Polytron with Fez

Housekeeping. GenQuest closed this as merge Polytron into Fez on 22:02, 20 December 2013. czar ♔ 07:08, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

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.

  • Support. I don't know who proposed to merge Polytron into Fez, but the template links here and there's no discussion on the matter. Polytron has no independent notability outside of Fez and would fit fine in either the game or Fish's article (if it's kept) for the time being. czar ♔ 02:24, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
    • I would avoid merging Polytron to Fish's article, as the company continues to operate despite Fish's departure from the industry. Merging here, on the other hand, is fine. --MASEM (t) 02:28, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose - he has apparently left the company - so any content about activities from this point forward would require separate articles anyway. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 17:07, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
@Varnent: To clarify, the proposal is to merge Polytron into Fez, not Fish. czar ♔ 20:02, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Oops - misread that. Merging Fez into Polytron would make more sense IMHO. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 22:14, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
@CyberSkull: Lack of independent notability would be the need. Do you have sources that specifically cover Polytron the company? Phil Fish has plenty of reliable sources specific to him, so his article doesn't have this issue. czar ♔ 13:40, 6 October 2013 (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.

Merge Fish with Fez

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to not merge the two games. Since it was proposed the article for Fish seems to have expanded greatly with sources that would assert that he would pass notability guidelines apart from his game. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:56, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, looks like Phil Fish (video game developer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) doesn't want to continue video game developing. Also, his biography is too whimsically small and obscure, which is why I nominate him to be merged with Fez since the Fish is exclusively synonymous with the game. Feng277394 (talk) 08:58, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Support I see no reason for there to be a separate article for him. His notability is directly tied to the Fez product and, at this point, we have no indication that there will ever be anything more to add to an article on him, making it a permastub based on a single product. It's just better to have any info on him be a part of this article. SilverserenC 21:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I know this can be an emotional subject, but Fish has plenty of independent, reliable sources as a bona fide personality to pass GNG individually without inheriting from Fez. With the features and interviews, he could easily have his own article. Now, Polytron on the other hand... czar ♔ 02:24, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I find it amusing how much this article is contested - and watch it for that reason - in any case - from what I have seen it is okay to leave them as independent articles. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 17:06, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I don't see a need to put Fish into this article. He's done enough outside of FEZ to warrant his own article. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 12:11, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Good God the man can never catch a break huh? Spends 4 years on a game and when he gets some where they try to play down his notability and relevance in the industry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:558:6006:1:413B:AAD2:285C:3AFD (talk) 08:54, 13 November 2013 (UTC) — 2001:558:6006:1:413B:AAD2:285C:3AFD (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Oppose. The Indie Game documentary is as much about Fish as it is about Fez. Also, The Verge is a source that is about Fish. Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:08, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. For both. The two articles proposed to be merged here fail to establish notability for standalone articles. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 06:18, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Comment I'd also like to point out the following: The articles fail to establish notability because "it has not been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." (WP:ORG, WP:BASIC, WP:GNG) The Polytron article only has two references: both from the company's website. One saying that the sequel got cancelled. The Fish article has one reference to an interview about him because of this game. The other three references all talk about his Twitter meltdown. I really don't see how all of these sources establish notability of any kind for the two articles. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 06:31, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment on Fish—I've been working on this Fez article for a few days now (almost done) and it doesn't make sense to incorporate Fish's controversies over the Japanese games and gamers writ large into the Fez article because they have nothing to do with the game and all to do with him (though their identities are closely intertwined, I haven't found a source yet that equates reaction to or boycott of Fish to feelings about Fez). I have a half-dozen sources on the side here (e.g., [1], [2], [3], [4]) that would work for Fish but not Fez, and even a cursory search should show Fish's easy significant coverage and independent passage of the GNG. Despite leaving the industry, notability is not temporary, so between that and the sources, it makes the most sense to give him the dedicated page. (Also I think he'd be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, but that's a later conversation.) I'll bring the article to DYK length when I'm done with this one. czar ♔ 23:25, 4 January 2014 (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.

Spacing with regards to code readability

I apologize for the revert of your edit, User:Czar. I was unaware of the BRD rule, which was the fault of myself.

My rationale for the change is that the current format of the "code" or syntax in the source of the article is hard to read, especially for newer users who may not be used to such things. The goal of projects like Flow and the VisualEditor are to increase retention amongst Wikipedia editors. While the VisualEditor is supposed to be a replacement for the source editor, I think many newer users will eventually move to source editing after becoming more experienced. To facilitate that change, the source of the page should be clean and readable by the layman. This is something that I feel is incredibly important to Editor Retention. I'd also like to mention that the documentation for the video game infobox template includes the spacing.

Nicereddy (talk) 00:15, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I understand that you feel it's important and that you've respaced several articles, but there is a general consensus on WP against non-content edits that only change article spacing. Additionally, per WP:EDITCONSENSUS, an article's current spacing is considered to have consensus. If there's no hard rule that says one formatting is preferred over the other, the article sticks with consensus unless a new consensus is reached on the talk page. As for the example on the template page, it's monospaced, so it looks pretty, but there's no obligation to use that spacing on non-fixed width pages that make the spacing jumbled anyway. For what it's worth, I also disagree that the edits you've made to the spacing will in any way affect editor retention (or even make the text more aesthetically pleasing). And if anything, VE is designed so new editors never touch wikitext. Have you tried running your opinion past Editor Retention? You can make bold edits to all of these articles, but it's going to be a whole lot of cleanup to revert them if no one else agrees with your view that infoboxes need extra spaces. If you'll permit me, we're here to build an encyclopedia, and I think there are more fruitful ways to improve articles than these types of edits. czar ♔ 00:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Reader feedback: I would like to know the rev...

177.134.193.242 posted this comment on 17 January 2014 (view all feedback).

I would like to know the revenue of the game

The game's revenue is not covered in any of the reliable sources (WP:VG/RS) nor was it provided at any time by the developer. The article includes the number of units sold, though. czar ♔ 20:00, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

That's really all we can say barring any numbers that polytron or other 3rd parties decide to release. --MASEM (t) 20:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Fez (video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: PresN (talk · contribs) 21:11, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


Starting the review, will be up shortly. --PresN 21:11, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Broken up into sections. I've played the game before, and watched Indie Game. Sorry for the sarcasm, it's meant to be tongue in cheek.

Lead
  • The first cite is fine, since its a direct quote, but you shouldn't have cites 3-5 in there- that sentence is a summary of something that's cited in the development section.
  • "Indie Game: The Movie,[5] which followed the game's final stages of development and Polytron's related legal issues" - makes it sound like the movie was just about Fez, reword to make it clear it was just one (major) part of the movie.
Gameplay
  • Oh, you and your player-characters.
  • "The power lets the player rotate" - what power? The power of the Fez?
  • "As a platform game, Gomez jumps between 2D ledges" - Gomez is a platform game?
  • "There are two different cubes[8] that count towards the 32 cube threshold" - two different types of cubes?
Development
  • "They worked well together.[7]" - this sentence is jarring. The two felt that they worked well together, maybe?
  • "and offered to treat Polytron as part of their company in exchange for a portion of Fez's earnings and Polytron could keep the intellectual property rights" - run-on sentence with that "and Polytron" bit, please revise
  • "Fish describes the game's changes" - tense shift, "Fish described" fits the rest of the section, though I'd prefer if all of it was in the vein of "Fish has described"
Indie Game
The Movie
  • I'm almost wondering if this whole dev section could be spun off into a "Development of Fez" subarticle. It's kind of long.
  • Actually, this section title is bad. Only the first paragraph of 5.5 paragraphs is about the movie. Maybe "Indie Game: The Movie and release" or just "release"
  • The last two sentences of para 3 use the same ref, so you don't need to list it twice.
Music
  • What's up with the floating sentence-paragraph?
  • You list the soundtrack name in the tracklist as "Fez Original Soundtrack", but it should be "Fez Original Soundtrack", or "Fez OST".
Reception
  • It's not a problem at the GA level, but the way each section is presented- "Reviewer a said x. Reviewer b said y. Reviewer c said z." without any narrative flow is really, really choppy, and you'd get dinged for it at FAC.
  • You have a topic sentence for paragraphs 3 and 4, but not 2.
References
  • Yay for archives!
  • One smooth-looking section all around, no issues.
Media
  • Mostly free, just a gameplay example shot. Nice job on the free media.
Misc.
  • About half of the wikilinks are redirects, which isn't wrong, per se, just prone to double-redirects.

Alright! Not that much to do, it's a really solid article. Putting it on hold for a bit. I will say that if you decide to go to FAC with it you'll want to get a copy-edit first, for flow moreso than grammar, or you'll get one of those monolith prose reviews that drag down a nomination. --PresN 21:58, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

@PresN: I appreciate the review. I'll have more time to address this next weekend, if that's all right with you? czar ♔ 03:20, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
That's fine, whenever you're free. --PresN 04:45, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
@PresN, do you have any ideas for what else I can cut from Development now that I split it off? Just the more minor details or can whole paragraphs go? It's hard because I originally wrote it using the information I thought was most interesting for the main article czar ♔ 22:11, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

@PresN, all right—I think I've addressed everything. Ready to take a look? Some notes:

  1. The mentioned cites were there per the last ¶ of WP:LEADCITE:

    Some material, including direct quotations and contentious material about living persons, must be provided with an inline citation every time it is mentioned, regardless of the level of generality or the location of the statement.

  2. Yes, Gomez is a platform game. A platform game within a platform game.
  3. The floating sentence-paragraph in music was meant to be expanded later. It's also kind of cute, no? Little paragraph about Chopin in the grand Fez morass?
  4. I thought the NYT intro to Reception ¶2 functioned as a topic sentence.

czar ♔ 22:36, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Alright, I think I'm happy with it. GA: get! --PresN 00:09, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination

{{Did you know nominations/Fez (video game)}} czar ♔ 18:17, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Development of Fez

In case anyone interested in this page is not watching that one- I have opened a discussion at Talk:Development of Fez questioning the necessity of the split. Views would be welcome. J Milburn (talk) 20:39, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Legacy

I'm collecting some sources here that might be useful if there is to be a "Legacy" section in the future. Feel free to add. Also see the similar section on Fish's talk page. czar ♔ 01:35, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Comments about the Development section

Congratulations for the recent promotion. I was holding off the following comments, because discussing more than one issue makes work difficult. I hope that this article will keep improving.

  • "Fez's five-year development", would "Fez's development is known for its protracted five-year cycle" be more clear?
  • "amount of public exposure", how much is that? Medium? Another source would be appropriate for a big amount.
  • "underdog darling of the indie game scene", this is also in the lead. "underdog darling" does not sound neutral for the lead. Is this perception supported by more sources?
  • What is the consensus about VG247 italicization?
  • "The Canadian developers", perhaps "These" or "Both Canadian developers" would be better.
  • "Though their partnership", is "though" better than "although"?
  • Why not reorder the "their partnership broke down" sentence and integrate note 2?
  • Which reminds me, note 1 says "a minimum of 32 cubes are required". Can the player collect more than 32 cubes before getting "New Game Plus"?
  • ][ looks more like "Right Square Bracket Left Square Bracket".
  • "He later recalled", perhaps "He would recall".
  • "public interest in Fez that rode a concurrent swell of interest in indie game development", how about "public interest in Fez that spread to indie game development".
  • "The game won", was Fez finished already? Is it correct to qualify it as "game"? What was the Excellence in Visual Art awarded for?
  • Note 3... could all these notes be integrated in the prose? The notes section looks like trivia.
  • "nearby Québécois developer-publisher Trapdoor", why not simply "Québécois publisher Trapdoor"?
  • "canceling the project before the ... offered to help. Fish felt ... rescued the game.", how about "canceling the project, but Québécois publisher Trapdoor offered to help and rescued the game."
  • Note 4 looks like trivia.

That should be all. Remember that the featured article star can be added with {{featured article}}. 84.127.80.114 (talk) 17:12, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the added review. I addressed each point either in the article or below. I wait for the bot to handle the bronze stars and archiving and whatnot. I think the first sentences is clearest as phrased. It insinuates that being known for public exposure means that the amount was great. I don't think it needs another source unless it is challenged as phrased. The "indie darling" phrase is used by a multitude of sources (easily found in WP:VG/RS's custom Google search) and I think it sums up its development best of all phrases. The lede doesn't profess it as incontrovertible truth, though, which is why it's in quotes. VG247 is a news site, so it's italicized per WP:ITALICS: "Online magazines, newspapers, and news sites with original content should generally be italicized". "Though" is fine. The footnotes are for information that would be distracting if left within the paragraph but add some explanation for those who would be curious. I think the notes have been sufficiently vetted at this point to be more substantive than trivia but not sufficiently important to be included in the main body. Good find on ][. Not sure if the question is rhetorical, but yes, you can get more than 32 cubes before NG+, but there is no source that says that or is interested in that. It wouldn't match the source to say that interest in Fez led to interest in indie game dev, though that sentence would be easier if it did. Yes, "the game won" awards before it was finished, as the sources will attest. Who knows how finished it was at the time, but that's how awards work. I prefer the current Trapdoor introduction as more precise—it mattered that they were nearby and that they also developed their own games. It's important to relay that Fish felt Trapdoor rescued the game, not to assert that on our own. czar ♔ 20:30, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

TFA

The 5th anniversary of release (April 13, 2017) would be a good time to run this article for "today's featured article". czar ⨹ 23:37, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Fez (video game) cover art.png to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Fez (video game) cover art.png will be appearing as picture of the day on December 11, 2015. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2015-12-11. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:20, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Fez (video game)
Fez is an indie puzzle platform game developed by Polytron Corporation and released in 2012. The player-character Gomez receives a fez that reveals his two-dimensional world to be one of four sides of a three-dimensional world; the player rotates between these four views to realign platforms, solve the game's puzzles, and collect cubes and cube fragments to restore order to the universe. Though criticized for technical issues, and in-game navigation and backtracking, Fez was commended for its emphasis on discovery and freedom, and became a keystone example of independent video game development.Illustration: Bryan Lee O'Malley
Archive – More featured pictures...

Use in Wikipedia

Why is Fez the face of Indie Task Force, and was permission obtained for this use? - 46.173.12.68 (talk) 06:21, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

The image appears to have been released under a Creative Commons SA license, which permits it to be used. - Bilby (talk) 06:27, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fez_(video_game)/Archive_1&oldid=1175455820"