Template talk:Dragon Quest series

Why is it messed up?

[edit]

Why is the format changed into "Dragon Warrior" games then followed by "Dragon Quest" games? Why couldn't they be listed by the order of their Roman Numerals? - Aresmo 10:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The policy on Wikipedia is to use the English titles when available. That's why Dragon Warrior I, II, III, IV, and VII appear. Dragon Quest V and VI were never released outside of Japan so "Dragon Warrior V" and "Dragon Warrior VI" don't exist. As for Dragon Quest VIII, it was released in both Japan and North America as Dragon Quest VIII. Kariteh 08:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But it just doesn't look good...The numbering system might confuse people who look at it. Why can't it be just the Roman Numerals as before (ie I, II, III, IV, V...)? They don't distinguish between DQ and DW unless one clicks on it, which then is taken to the page under the proper heading (Dragon Warrior, Dragon Quest V, Dragon Warrior VII, etc.) - Aresmo 15:51, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any logical reason to put 7 before 5. it only distinguish the names when you select the link, and an unordered number system is just confusing. They should be listed in numerical order. (PS: sorry for editing without looking at the talk page first)El cid the hero 21:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well I was just stating the logic and choice that was made, it wasn't mine. You might want to ask about this in the DQ Project talk page as they're the ones who did that. Kariteh 22:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and reordered the games in the template. The DQ project is dead anyway. Kariteh 20:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I did that too once, but someone else changed it back. Glad to see it held up for so long this time and hopefully it will stay that way. The old format wasn't just confusing, it was just plain wrong. SoulSlayer 12:39, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other games in the series

[edit]

What happened to the other games in the series? There used to be links of Dragon Quest Monsters and Torneko in the template, pretty much the same as the Final Fantasy template does, but it's nowhere to be found now. Why? Anonymous User

I just added other Dragon Quest titles to the template, but only those which have been released. The Dragon Quest/Warrior Monsters games generally link to the same article, Dragon Quest Monsters, but each should be broken into its own article (Dragon Quest Monsters: Joker is already an article on its own). I did not include Torneko, since articles do not yet exist for any of the Torneko games. If you disagree with this edit, please let me know here or on my talk page before deleting or reverting.Zenithian 20:57, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need to cram the extra content into this template; that's what the category is for. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:23, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So since the article Dragon Quest only describes the main series, do you propose we create additional templates for each of the spin-off series (Dragon Quest Heroes, Dragon Quest Monsters, Dragon Quest Swords, Torneko - since each type of spin-off has more than one title)? I think it is better to have one template for related titles, as opposed to multiple ones (see Template:Final_Fantasy_series). Zenithian 18:40, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Zenithian, after all, a wiseman once said "A flower is more valuable than a field of scattered petals". I'd wondered about the lack of games in the Dragon Quest template for some time now. I did not imagine someone was actively keeping them out. Icecypher 09:42 CT 14 February 2007
Add another vote of support to having the spinoffs on there. The point of the template is to allow easy accesses to related articles, and as a spinoff like Rocket Slime is the most recently released game in the US it could be quite likely that someone looking at DQ VIII will want to move to Rocket Slime. The only reason to not include the information is a crammed template, but it does not look that cramped. I would even consider modeling this template after the one they use on the Japanese Dragon Quest site. SMimas 17:43, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon Quest 9

[edit]

AMIB, stop removing Dragon Quest 9 from the list. Game that are not reliased can and should be put on templated El cid the hero 04:02, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't have a release date, or a single screenshot, or a playable demo. It exists in hypothetical form only. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:16, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My attitude is that if it notable enough to have an article (and it is Dragon Quest IX so there’s no debate that it deserves one) than its deserves to be included in the template, despite what little information is available on it El cid the hero 13:15, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Lots of games are noteworthy enough for an article, but aren't so important as to rise to being valuable for navigation. Right now. DQ9 is a title and a release platform, and nothing else. It's not important yet. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:40, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You know, we actually have a video, a couple of screenshots, the logo and a 2007 realease date for Japan (check IGN.com)... So what else do you need to convince you it is not "in hypothetical form only"?87.203.29.187 10:27, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It hasn't been shown in playable form, and it has no release date. It's just too far away; there's no need to link to two-paragraph articles in central navigation boxes. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:55, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
but is there any harm to adding it either? pluss, when more info is release, it will make finding the page easier El cid the hero 09:34, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care about your little edit war here. I feel that the Dragon Quest IX article will be included in the near-future anyway. I suggest someone take this up with the Arbitration Committee to see if the inclusion of IX is truly viable at this time. I think it is, but that's my opinion. --Whatocean 10:39, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i would agree to that El cid the hero 10:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No playable demos? We saw some of the developers demoing it. We know it's playable. And we know it's coming this year. We know the platform, how it plays, how it looks, and who is developing it. DQIX does not have enough information, the article just isn't informative enough. It needs to blossom into a real article - describing all of the gameplay and various information. - A Link to the Past (talk) 07:37, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a high standard to have to meet. All a game needs is to have been shown in playable form, have a final name, and have a final release date. That's a really low bar. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's in playable form and has a final name. - A Link to the Past (talk) 08:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wh has written hands-on impressions? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No one. The only people who have played it are the creators, who played it on stage. - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So it's impossible for the article to have anything but what the creators or the publishers have said. Given that the article is going to be brief and consist only of repeating (future!) claims in primary sources, I think that's an excellent reason to exclude it from the template until there's some encyclopedic content.
Final name because working names are often inconsistent, poorly-promoted, and/or made up on the spot. Final release date so we exclude vaporware. Displayed in playable form so there's some possibility of useful commentary in non-primary sources. It's a reasonable standard, and a very low bar to jump. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is not as if they had some small demo level. It was a very complete game that they've been working on for a very long time. - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i don't believe a game need a final release date to be eligible for inclusion into a template El cid the hero 19:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This time I'll have to partly agree with A Man In Black. Final Fantasy XIII is not included in the FF template, and there's even has a list of FF XIII related (unreleased) games. I do agree it'd be nice to see the announced game in the template (perhaps with a note saying it is not out yet), but at least this is consistent with how other games are treated. Icecypher 10:00 CT 14 February 2007

Character classes

[edit]

I added Character classes from the Dragon Quest series to the template. If you don't like it then just revert my edit. --The Dark Side 02:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slime games

[edit]

... If the Slime games will be placed in "Others", please do not separate Kenshin from Swords. Icecypher 18:16, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really, A Link to the Past, one revert ago you were stating that "two games do not make a series, they make a game and its sequel", now you go back to "Dragon Quest Heroes" as a name for the series when it is not even the name of a single game... The first of your reverts makes me think you were throwing a tantrum, even when I try to assume good faith from you. The second makes me think you simply do not care about what others have to say. Care to really explain why naming the series "Dragon Quest Heroes" is the way to go? Let us show people we can solve this without needing to call the rest of the Wikipedia community, which it is past time we did, actually. Icecypher 22:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because people opposed the dismantling of it as a series. Regardless, I provided a source to say that it can be called the DQ Heroes series - if IGN calling it the Slime MoriMori series is a good source, then Eurogamer calling it the DQ Heroes series should be acceptable combined with the fact that guidelines suggest we use an appropriate English title. - A Link to the Past (talk) 08:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please continue the discussion at the project talk page so we have everything grouped in one place. Kariteh 09:11, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Continuing the discussion at only one place is not necessary. Eurogamer is a quality source. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:02, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe, maybe not, either way, it isn't as quality as Yuji Horii's word translated by Square Enix. Kariteh 20:14, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, let me give a big DUH. What do you think he'd do? Call it the DQ Heroes franchise before the name even existed? - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What if we propose this discussion for review by others? That way, we can objectively see what has been said (even if it is apparently not read by everyone) and what sources have been presented. At least it will be obvious no one had said these games are not a series before Link changed the template to move the games to "Others". Let us hope he is not simply trying to oppose whatever is said, changing his stance (or lack of) accordingly. It is no longer funny... Icecypher 21:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Of course Horii wouldn't call it the DQ Heroes series, since the name didn't exist then. The point is that the term "DQ Heroes series" didn't exist then and still doesn't exist officially now. When a game site uses the term used officially by the compagny, it confirms something; but when a game site uses a term which has as far as we know never been used by the compagny, then this doesn't really confirm anything. Especially when that term, DQ Heroes series, has apparently been used only once on their site on maybe the entire web.
In any case, I agree with Icecypher's proposition; I'm not sure how to bring new people to this discussion, but they would be welcome. Kariteh 22:31, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For one, if DQ Heroes is considered a series, as well could the Sword games. Also, in all English countries, Slime MoriMori has no connection. They do not even know that there's a game that predates it, so the best thing to do is to tell them that it is not a franchise - telling them that it is a franchise and giving a name that is 100% nonsensical to them because they don't know the game as that does nothing. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Right. Let's delete the article Itadaki Street series too, and the Densetsu no Stafy series, and Fadilj Vokrri, and Timbuktu, and Dicionário Houaiss da Língua Portuguesa, and Giorgi Arveladze, etc. Nobody knows them in English countries, so surely they don't exist. Kariteh 07:26, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good comparison. After all, I said "let's delete series that don't exist in English". Have fun ever explaining why following naming conventions is the same as demanding any foreign subject be removed from Wikipedia. - A Link to the Past (talk) 07:56, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The name Slime MoriMori is not non-sensical, it is the name implied by the fact that the second game in Japan is called the same name as the first but with a "2", and confirmed by series creator Yuji Horii and Square Enix official Richard Honeywood. While it may or may not have a "connection" in English countries, it happens to be the only existing official name for that series in the world, as the name that you came up with has only ever been used by one non-official website.
"They do not even know that there's a game that predates it": you seem to have forgotten it, but we're on an encyclopedia. The aim of an encyclopedia is to inform people about facts, not tell them what they already "know" and ignore or hide the rest. Kariteh 07:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
EHhe.... oh boy. Since this is the English version of Wikipedia, we should write the articles using the official names used when the games were released in the US. If they weren't released in the US, we'll have to use the japanese name. Noting what the Japanese name was is fine, but for ease of reading we should just stick with the US name everywhere else.--Marhawkman 17:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Coming into this a bit late, im not 100% about what the problem is but, if you cant reach a concensus about the DQ/DW template thing, i think it should be slime mori mori because that game came out first and all. personally, id just change it to say slime as a general category, but its never been called that...but looking back at the two slime game pages, ive noticed that on the Slime MoriMori Dragon Quest: Shougeki No Shippo Dan it says it is part of the "Dragon Quest Heroes series" which then links you to the next game in the series. now i may be just missing something here, but how can a game be part of a series that is named after a game that came out after the first game? even though this is english wikipedia, that doesnt make much sense. Evaunit666 00:31, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is this: The first game is Slime Morimori, and the second (released here) is Rocket Slime. However, in America there is no name for the series, since only one of the games was released. Because of that, the only valid references to these games being a series are the ones from the japanese series. What is being said is that a name does not exist for the series in America, so the japanese name for the series should be used, until there is a name here. A Link to the Past has been changing arguments back and forth just to have the series as Dragon Quest Heroes, which is not even the name of the game (Square Enix of America call it Rocket Slime). My personal take agrees with Kariteh's, we should leave this as Slime Morimori until an official series name exists on America. Icecypher 13:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rocket Slime can be used to describe both games. Rocket is the name of the character (who is the same with each game), and Slime is the species (who is the same in each game). That is a significant connection. - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I guess Squeenix didn't decide to name the series until they made the second game? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Marhawkman (talk • contribs) 04:20, 3 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

ALTTP, you are ignoring official sources. On the one hand, there's Yuji Horii and Richard Honeywood using the term "Slime MoriMori series". This makes it an official term, at least in Japan. On the other hand, there's one European video gaming site making up in passing a term, "Dragon Quest Heroes series", which only they have ever used. The two sources definitely don't have the same weight. Only the first has real weight because it's official (the interviewee's words, not the site in itself). If the term Dragon Quest heroes series were used in something like, the majority of video gaming sites, it would have much more weight despite not being official, but currently, the term seems both unofficial and in the minority. The term Slime MoriMori series is Japanese, but it's the only official term and the more used one. Kariteh 20:35, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now ALTTP has changed his view to say "Rocket Slime" is good for both games (original (lack of) research), and then tomorrow he'll go back to vandalizing the template to add the DQ Heroes thing... I guess you have more than demonstrated why, for now, Slime Morimori is the way to go, no need to waste more effort trying to convince just him... Icecypher 22:31, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Since you're doing the EXACT same thing (except with a different aim), then you feel that you are vandalizing the article. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well in my opinion, i think slime morimori should be the series title. Although its not the english title, if the problem is that no one knows what slime morimori is, thats not the case. a lot of fans know that name and nintendo power, if im not mistaken, introduced the game as slime morimori before an english name was given. Evaunit666 00:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe use Slime morimori/rocket slime?--Marhawkman 00:30, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We don't cater to fans - we cater to people who would NOT understand the title of Slime MoriMori. People are much more likely to understand what DQ Heroes means. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I spend a good part of my time with people who know the game (different ages, different countries) and I have not seen any of them thinking of Rocket Slime as "Dragon Quest Heroes". That said, I don't really see a benefit by using that title. Icecypher 14:49, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the company is trying to use "Dragon Quest Heroes" as a sort of blanket name for spin-off games. But most people will recognize the rocket slime game as Rocket slime rather than Dragon quest heroes.--Marhawkman 19:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
i see that people are still changing the template. i dont really want to get into an arguement or anything and i might be missing the point, but right now it says dragon quest heroes. i think if i was a non-fan, i would be looking for the "slime game one", not the "one with heroes in the title". so i think slime morimori would be more helpful to non-fans. just a thought. Evaunit666 03:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your input Evaunit666. It seems ALTTP chooses to ignore it and everybody's arguments in this long discussion, unfortunately. Kariteh 16:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So have you. No English non-fan is helped by using Slime MoriMori. It doesn't matter which English title you use, you're fighting for the Japanese title. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:31, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion

[edit]

I think we should include all of the games. Not just ones that have been released in english.--Marhawkman 21:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Itadaki Street?

[edit]

There is no mention of the three dq related Itadaki Street games on the main DQ page at all. Should they be added to the template? Or does somebody want to add an extra section to the dragon quest main page to talk about them and link from the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.160.98.31 (talk) 21:01, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers

[edit]

The Dragon Quest games are not numbered in Europe. The subtitles should be specified for DQIV, V, VI and VIII to account for this fact. Kariteh (talk) 19:45, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point, but do you think there's enough room to put them on the template? Evaunit♥666♥ 00:51, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is but my edit was reverted.[1] Kariteh (talk) 07:44, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the subtitles should be added (or at least put in parenthesis after the numeral), on the games which were released in Europe without numerals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.160.98.31 (talk) 20:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like the way Kariteh had it. Evaunit♥666♥ 22:46, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If everyone agrees I guess we can try it, unless people start to complain about it. Aresmo (talk) 14:45, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fan Mode

[edit]

I already put Fan Mode section in the Template.--Woad85 (talk) 02:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removing subtitles

[edit]

Rather than get into an edit war over this, I'll be the bigger person and start a discussion.

Since DQ9 now uses the numerical number in it and both the Japanese and US versions have the numbering and navigation issues are about ease of navigation, I believe all the subtitles should be removed. I am aware of the previous discussion adding them, but that consensus was before DQ9 came out. Furthermore, the long subtitles actually hinder navigation because of their length and inconsistancy with the rest of the series. Finally, since the original game was not numbered and the last game has a subtitle in English, it seems rather arbitrary in the way things are handled.

Finally, many other series are known by their subtitles and navigation titles use only numerical representation. Dragon Quest main series given that it has numbers doesn't need the subtitles if they can do without.陣内Jinnai 00:13, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree. Yes, Dragon Quest IX is numbered in all territories but the remake series has not yet been numbered in Europe and there's been no indication that that is going to change. I don't see how the subtitles hinder navigation. They may make the template less aesthetically pleasing but I don't see how they make it more difficult to use. On the other hand, they may be very useful for European gamers. I think we should wait and see what they do with the titles for future remakes before taking action. This template is going to be something of a compromise for some time - for example the title 'Dragon Quest and Dragon Warrior games' isn't ideal but is accurate for the moment. In addition we also don't list Dragon Warrior in the titles for 1, 2 and 3 and that is clearly something that would qualify under the same issue. Fianlly DQ9 does have the roman numeral so a subtitle for that isn't nessasary in any instance and without the release of DQ6 in Europe yet, the subtitle isn't needed. We cannot forsee how they will release it so its better to make it simpler and easier to navigate.陣内Jinnai 00:12, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The European title for VI is stated on the page for that game and is sourced. It doesn't change the fact that the previous remakes have not been numbered in Europe. Your edits make no sense whatsoever, the template as it is may be inconsistent but there is at least some rationale behind it. Your edit introduces inconsistencies that are totally arbitrary. Your reasons for removing the subtitles seem unconvincing and I can't help but feel that you're pushing your own personal preference rather than any real usability issue. There is a previous consensus on this issue, there is no consensus for your position and your edits have been repeatedly reverted by several different editors. I suggest you leave the template alone until you generate a consensus for your viewpoint. EvilRedEye (talk) 22:55, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the reasons stated previously for adding the subtitles it was because Europeans may have a hard time using this template to find the game. I disagree with that, but I know that local consensus on that hasn't changed. Dragon Quest IX has a roman numeral on it and therefore like the Dragon Quest games it doesn't need the special treatment. Dragon Quest 6 hasn't been released in Europe yet and thus its crystalballing to say it won't have a numeral on it.
Navboxes are made for ease of searching, not to be the most specific and exhaustive names that try to closely match the actual article title. If they did all navboxes with video games would include subtitles. The point being here these is no consensus to change it to use the subtitle when it was shown the European release wouldn't have it (I've been watching this template for some time so I know, however I can go back to the history and check). Do not continue to revert it.
The change I proposed was to undo the local consensus on the subtitles for the games released in Europe without a roman numeral.陣内Jinnai 03:21, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Dragon_Quest_series&oldid=1230295423"