Yes they're linked to the game, but just because that has context to the game doesn't make it relevant to the actual game product itself. It's just a dispute between individuals that has been reported on. It's simply not relevant to the actual finished game though. Why not rather just locate it to Hideo Kojima's page that's y'know, specifically about Kojima.Īt this point it would be within reason to add Hayter's removal from MGS under the controversy section, and have probably five paragraphs of opinions from the press on that too. Logically you will have to put it on the page of every game he makes from here onwards if the topic is ever brought up again. Yes of course it has relevance to MGS5 but it is about Kojima's work as a whole, not specifically MGSV. Criticism regarding Kojima'sĭepiction of anything should go under Kojima's page. To reiterate, an encyclopedic entry on a video game should not highlight a single person's opinion on a topic, nor focus on personal criticism leveled at any one individual who worked on it. Controversy surrounding Kojima's depiction of anything belongs on Kojima's page. Likewise this isn't about Kojima, it's specifically about MGSV and any controversy that has surrounded that. Failing that I have to ask, is this an encyclopedic entry or an opinion piece? A single opinion should not be highlighted to speak for everyone, period. Why should we focus on the reception of just one character to begin with? The reviews discuss many other characters too. I would argue though this isn't a page to discuss Quiet's reception as a character to begin with. Wikipedia isn't for representing any one opinion, and sorry but regardless of how valid Polygon is as a reviewer, a review is still just an opinion. It's irrelevant that you can't find an alternative opinion, but here Īn absence of an alternative opinion is not an excuse for bias. Prisonermonkeys ( talk) 12:58, 25 September 2015 (UTC) Reply The lack of an alternative opinion does not invalidate the existing opinion, and so I can only surmise that while you say you want to restore balance to the section, you simply want to remove criticism of Kojima. However, that is an argument built on a fallacy because I can find no alternative opinion from a reliable source. You claim that the paragraph about the depiction of Quiet is inherently biased because it presents no alternative point of view. Kojima is then criticised for the sexualised depiction of Quiet in TPP, and you don't think that's relevant, especially considering that TPP is a direct sequel to GZ, and that Kojima attempted to address this issue with the Paz scenes in TPP? It's called context if a composer has faced similar criticisms for similar creative choices within a broader body of work, it is highly relevant. Kojima was criticised for the sexualised depiction of Paz in GZ. This is not a page for individual opinions to represent themselves, the topic is the reception of Quiet's depiction by the community and press overall and no other views have been represented. Naming the writer of said article and talking about the article is also irrelevant. If there is further controversy after launch then there needs to be significantly more evidence to show that a substantial number of people found her depiction a problem. The section is about the controversy before the game was launched. It should go under the character's section in the 'List of Metal Gear' characters page, the character's page or else it is simply not noteworthy. Finally, discussion of the character is not relevant to this page. The paragraph I removed is not neutral either, there was nothing about the positive response the character has received or an otherwise more balanced view. General fan response has been positive towards Quiet in community websites. The game has received numerous reviews and accolades at this point and they do not highlight that Quiet was a major issue for them. Post game there has not been significant outcry about the character in reviews or otherwise. The section in question regards Quiet's controversy before the game was released. This article is not the place to detail the reception of a character. Okay putting this up to avoid a stupid edit war, made it clear in my edit summaries. Per WP:BRD, please discuss any further ideas before editing again. Polygon is considered a reliable source, that's why it is included here. 86.40.31.62:, please note that removing sourced content because you don't agree with it is your opinion.
0 kommentar(er)
