Talk:Persona 4 Arena

Ultimax: New version or sequel?

The article claims both. Can we get a clarification? --86.184.64.12 (talk) 15:07, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

It's a little of both. I suppose if you wanted to pick one you could run with "sequel". TheStickMan^[✆Talk] 15:52, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

It is definitely a sequel. Now that we now more info, not only it has more characters but also advances the plot. Jotamide (talk) 16:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Source

A detailed source about the game's region locking. --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:49, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

NOT A visual novel

The P4A games ARE NOT VISUAL NOVELS. Firstly, we are going by the original arcade releases. They don't have a story mode. Secondly, EVEN if you factor in story mode, it's still not a visual novel due to the gameplay factor alone. Portraits and dialogue boxes do not a visual novel make - that constitutes 99% of all PS2-era RPG's. So STOP adding that in. --173.170.159.16 (talk) 23:53, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

• We go with what sources say, and this article is not only about the arcade release.--IDV^talk 23:56, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Then by all means, add it to the BlazBlue and Guilty Gear pages. See what happens. --173.170.159.16 (talk) 00:58, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
    • I don't know anything about BlazBlue and Guilty Gear, but that's completely irrelevant. We are citing reliable sources calling these games visual novels, and the way Wikipedia works is that we write what reliable sources say about a subject, regardless of our own personal opinions.--IDV^talk 05:44, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
      • You DON'T know anything about anything, because if you did, you'd KNOW that it's relevant. Now shut up and leave it alone. --173.170.159.16 (talk) 07:47, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

@173.170.159.16, please change your tone immediately. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, if you like to tell other people what to do, please start your own Persona website. Concerning the genre changes: Wikipedia is based upon sources, and that's it. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:28, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

• @IP user: I recommend that you read WP:Verifiability. Using reliable sources is everything on Wikipedia – we simply cannot choose to ignore what sources say about a subject and use our own personal opinions instead, because that would be WP:Original research. If reliable sources use a particular genre to describe a game, then we should cite those sources and use the same genre label to describe the game in our articles. For a list of video game sources considered reliable and usable on Wikipedia, see WP:VG/S.--IDV^talk 19:23, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Necropost! Going by all the other ArcSys games that were released in arcades first, and received console ports with story modes utilizing visual novel elements, it is indeed the case that whatever's in the infobox is based on the original arcade release. I literally looked through every other fighting game on here to see if this was the case lol. And it is. The P4 arcade versions did not have VN story modes, so therefore, they are not visual novels. It's perfectly fine to put in the article itself that the console versions have VN story modes, but not in the infobox. If you want to change this, there needs to be a wide consensus, and the changes will have to be applied to EVERY fighting game with a VN story mode, not just P4. --2603:9000:CC02:4E00:F98A:C82:C77:F330 (talk) 20:49, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

The infobox is for the game in general, not just one version of it. If other fighting games also have extensive VN-style story modes, and we have sources calling them that, then those should also be changed. You talk about consensus, but the idea that infoboxes should only be concerned with the original release of a game is the one that is not widely adopted - virtually every article about a game that has seen multiple ports covers all of them and includes them in their infoboxes.--Alexandra^IDV 21:29, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Well, if that's the case then it really does need to be applied to everything that can be confirmed. It's pretty shifty to cherry pick based on personal tastes. --2603:9000:CC02:4E00:158F:D0CD:1689:E041 (talk) 04:32, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm in agreement with you that it should be done if good sources can be found and cited - but I want to clarify that when it comes to video games, I mostly edit RPG/adventure game articles and adjacent stuff like this one (as a Persona spin-off), as that's what I'm interested in. I'm just one person and cannot be aware of all problems that articles I do not work on have, and some fighting game articles not being as good as they could/should is not out of malice.--Alexandra^IDV 11:44, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Image

Since this game was originally an arcade, shouldn't we replace the current infobox image with promo of the arcade? I think this might fit but I'm not sure since it uses the Japanese title. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 12:41, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

• The point of the infobox image is identification, and given that the arcade version was JP-exclusive this does not seem ideal on enwp.--Alexandra^IDV 14:06, 8 February 2022 (UTC)