Talk:Fez (video game)

File:FEZ trial gameplay HD.webm to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:FEZ trial gameplay HD.webm will be appearing as picture of the day on October 17, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-10-17. 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) 02:05, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Picture of the day

A video from the trial mode for Fez, an indie puzzle-platform video game developed by Polytron Corporation and published by Trapdoor in 2012. In this game, 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 must rotate between these four 2D views to realign platforms and solve the game's puzzles.Video: Polytron Corporation

Proposed merge of Development of Fez into Fez (video game)#Development

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.

---

There doesn't really appear to be a reason why this development article, with a massive WP:OVERLAP, needs to be separate from the article on the main game. To be sure, I am a fan of FEZ, but this feels like overkill when a fairly long and detailed development and design section already exists. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:52, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep. The development itself, wrapped in the celebrity of its developer, is covered in extreme length by reliable, independent sources[1][2][3] and was the primary subject of an ensemble documentary. The split article contains detail/depth that would be overkill to cover in the main (featured) article, which already has the core information readers would need to know about the subject. The split article exists to expand on that with detail befitting an independently notable sub-subject. czar 13:04, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
• Keep per CZAR.  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 22:35, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
• Comment The game's page is about 50k of prose, the development page is about 30k. Give about 5k of summary of the development in the game's page, such that the merged page would be about 75k of prose. That's just at a point for WP:SIZE where splitting is suggested, but not "required". I would lean to keep based on this. See notes below, I was using the wrong measurement. --Masem (t) 00:31, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
• Merge. To be honest, I'm not seeing much in the development article that can't be covered here. This article's only 21kB of readable prose, and Development of Fez is only 14kB. Together, that'd be 35kB, hardly large enough to justify a split—and it'd probably be smaller, once repeated text is accounted for. We discussed the "Development of" articles at MOS:VG fairly recently and there was general agreement that it should only be done in extraordinary circumstances. This doesn't strike me as one of those. JOEBRO⁶⁴ 20:36, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

  I got much higher numbers on prose size. Which tool are you using to count? Masem (t) 21:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

  WP:Prosesize reports those numbers as "readable prose size". IceWelder [✉] 21:59, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

  Got it, I was using like the second number in the list, not that lower one. I would have to agree then that the merged page would not be a SIZE problem on that. Masem (t) 22:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Merge, per Joebro64. I'm also not seeing much in the Development of Fez article that can't be included here or isn't already included here. Additional comment: If this article is merged, then the Fez good topic will cease to exist. Not that that matters, but it's something to note. NegativeMP1 21:52, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Keep The Development article meets the notability requirements, and would take up a lot of space in the main article. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:47, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
• Keep. Seems like a decent SIZE splitoff and there's sufficient coverage of the topic. SnowFire (talk) 06:10, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
• Merge I don't think SUMMARY is being well followed in the development section, and could easily be covered in the parent article. There aren't SIZE issues even if they were merged in their entirety. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 18:30, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Merge. Having read through the article, it would not be too large to be merged into Fez, per SUMMARY as stated above. Nobody expects the UnexpectedSmoreInquisition (talk)! 13:02, 17 October 2023 (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.

GameRankings

Should the paragraph in the reception section about GameRankings be removed now that GameRankings was shuttered several years ago? StewdioMACK (talk) 07:30, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Sure, I think it's fair to remove that sentence now that its top games lists are no longer maintained. We only know the list "as of 2014". Alternatively, we can reorient that sentence to Metacritic's top lists. czar 12:54, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for taking a shot at that. Amazing article.

Side note but I am trying to get Ether One to good article soon and I'm frequently using this article as inspiration for things like formatting. You made some comments on the talk page a few years ago which I've tried to address along with the other GAN feedback from back then. I'm still rewriting a few sections to reduce quote farming but any feedback or edit ideas you have are welcomed. No pressure at all. StewdioMACK (talk) 14:31, 16 August 2024 (UTC)