242
edits
Talk:Twitch Plays Pokémon: Difference between revisions
→Criticisms
| Line 173: | Line 173: | ||
::I'm not altogether sure that's such a good idea. Ideally the page needs to only include what's encyclopaedically and factually relevant. Internal battles within the community, whether the games are getting easier to play, whether the runs are getting dull or repetitive and whether Battle Revolution is being used too much are all a matter of individual opinion - if anything, this would ''introduce'' bias to an otherwise neutral article. The declining vieweship has already been addressed ''("...the community has downsized considerably since the first season...")''. --[[User:Kip|<span style="color:#f29c6b">'''K'''</span><span style ="color:#5fc2d9">'''i'''</span><span style="color:#f29c6b">'''p'''</span>]] | [[User_talk:Kip|Talk]] 14:30, 4 July 2016 (UTC) | ::I'm not altogether sure that's such a good idea. Ideally the page needs to only include what's encyclopaedically and factually relevant. Internal battles within the community, whether the games are getting easier to play, whether the runs are getting dull or repetitive and whether Battle Revolution is being used too much are all a matter of individual opinion - if anything, this would ''introduce'' bias to an otherwise neutral article. The declining vieweship has already been addressed ''("...the community has downsized considerably since the first season...")''. --[[User:Kip|<span style="color:#f29c6b">'''K'''</span><span style ="color:#5fc2d9">'''i'''</span><span style="color:#f29c6b">'''p'''</span>]] | [[User_talk:Kip|Talk]] 14:30, 4 July 2016 (UTC) | ||
:::The way [[{{PAGENAME}}]] works could be considered a whole different game compared to the single player only counterpart, such as the participant and strategic side of games like Team Fortress 2 and the MMO genre (not so much of the mechanics found in them, such as those found in League of Legends or Dota 2, but for the sake of argument, this thing has many participants playing a game). Any online game needs community managers to make sure that it is fun for as many people as possible. Using this way to define {{PAGENAME}}, this can be considered a game and not a channel. A [[:Category:Games|game]] is and should be open to criticism, so should {{PAGENAME}} be? I'll leave that open for debate. If not, then we critique it from a media point of view, such as a [[:Category:Movies|movie]] or [[:Pokémon anime|TV show]]. If still not, does that mean that Bulbapedia just documents anything Pokémon and that's it? --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 05:19, 8 July 2016 (UTC) | :::The way [[{{PAGENAME}}]] works could be considered a whole different game compared to the single player only counterpart, such as the participant and strategic side of games like Team Fortress 2 and the MMO genre (not so much of the mechanics found in them, such as those found in League of Legends or Dota 2, but for the sake of argument, this thing has many participants playing a game). Any online game needs community managers to make sure that it is fun for as many people as possible. Using this way to define {{PAGENAME}}, this can be considered a game and not a channel. A [[:Category:Games|game]] is and should be open to criticism, so should {{PAGENAME}} be? I'll leave that open for debate. If not, then we critique it from a media point of view, such as a [[:Category:Movies|movie]] or [[:Pokémon anime|TV show]]. If still not, does that mean that Bulbapedia just documents anything Pokémon and that's it? --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 05:19, 8 July 2016 (UTC) | ||
::::Oh absolutely - games and subsequently game staff should be open to criticism as much as anything else, and criticism of [[{{PAGENAME}}]] certainly does exist. The only issue is drawing the line of encyclopaedic relevancy (since Bulbapedia is an encyclopaedia, not a review site). For me, criticism only becomes encyclopaedically relevant if there is a near-pan-universal criticism that the majority of users will hold in some degree, or criticism by the majority of verified experts in that field, ideally in so it affects something so profoundly that changes are implemented. If, for example, criticism of the staff was leveed by a clear majority of users and led to a measurable drop in views, a noticeable boycott of the stream or a significant shift in staff policies, that would definitely warrant a mention. If the criticism was leveed by a majority of professional critics or game reviewers, this would also warrant a mention. However, the criticism in this case is primarily on the channel's subreddit (itself a portion of the whole community), and even then, only a subset of the users on that subreddit. That criticism is also disputed by a significant number of other users, and the majority appear to try and avoid it altogether. It's therefore dubious to note criticisms that only a section of a section of {{PAGENAME}} community members hold (those criticisms' in themselves being disputed), since this misrepresent the majority of users and risk damaging the neutrality of the article. --[[User:Kip|<span style="color:#f29c6b">'''K'''</span><span style ="color:#5fc2d9">'''i'''</span><span style="color:#f29c6b">'''p'''</span>]] | [[User_talk:Kip|Talk]] 16:48, 12 July 2016 (UTC) | |||