When to split and when to merge: A discussion

Ok, so going through the site I've noticed some peculiar things. One thing that stands up though is that the site is extremely inconsistent when it comes whether or not a game should have it's own game pages. There are obvious errors of course like merging the Castlevania game for NES and the one for N64 in the same entry which are two game that almost couldn't be more different. But other are not so obvious I think we should get some kind of consensus in this matter. First let me give you some examples (along with what I think should be done about it):
Final Fight and Final Fight Guy has seperate entries despite Final Fight Guy being the exact same game with one dude missing. (Merge)
Super Mario World and Super Mario World: Super Mario Advance 2 are basically the same game with some extra stuff in the Advance version. (Merge)
Final Fantasy IV for the GBA is merged with the other FF4 titles. Essentially the same as the other games but with a new script, another dungeon and some other goodies. (Undecided but leaning towards remain as is).
Final Fantasy IV for the DS is merged with the other FF4 titles despite being a complete overhaul in pretty much every single way. (Split)

So what does everyone else think?

I believe that all those should be merged with the new versions added as releases.

So then what should we do with for example NHL '95, 96, 97 and 98 for the Genesis? I mean, they are virtually identical except that the players database is adjusted to match the roster at that time. Should maybe the 32-bit console games be moved to their own entries too? In either case, all of those games have more in common with each other than for example FF4 for SNES and FF4 for the DS.

making sticky for further discussion

I made a post on this sort of thing in editing and tools

The Punisher is two separate games for NES and Xbox/PS2/PC, yet they're both under the same page

NARC has two separate pages, but the one for the most recent ps2/xbox game has all the platforms the original game was released on

it's getting very confusing

I think basically, something like final fantasy iv should only have one entry.  you can list changes made to it in each version in the article.  but games like The Punisher for NES and then again for Xbox/ps2/pc should have separate entries due to the fact they have completely different stories, gameplay, etc

Super Mario Advance 2 includes a remake of Mario Bros., so it could be considered a compilation of sorts. I'm leaning toward a separate article for that one, but one could easily make a case for either one.

The DS version of Final Fantasy IV is significantly different from the previous versions of that game, so I'd suggest a split for that one. However, the game is titled Final Fantasy IV, which could cause potential confusion for some people.

all the advance games include Mario Bros., though.  I don't think they constitute compilations.  Technically, that'd make Tekken 5 a compilation, because it includes the arcade versions of Tekken 1, 2, and 3.  and any other game that includes a previous version as well.

The DS version of Final Fantasy IV is significantly different from the previous versions of that game, so I'd suggest a split for that one. However, the game is titled Final Fantasy IV, which could cause potential confusion for some people."

yeah, I'd say that page is perfectly fine for all versions of FF4

Here's what I think GB should be like:

Different games following the same story should be split. For example, all 3D versions of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban are Action/Adventures, while the GBA version is a turn-based RPG. It makes no sense for these games to share the same page. This is even more true for games that weren't even based on the same media and/or developed at very different times (so yes, The Incredible Hulk should stay split). And obviously games that just happen to share the same title but have absolutely nothing to do with eachother otherwise (can't think of one right now) should be split. That goes without saying.

Ports and remakes, though, should generally share the same page. Only when it's a complete "re-imagining" or whatever of an old game like The Bard's Tale should it get its own page. This means all FFIV games should share one page. Sure, the DS version has some nifty new 3D graphics, but it's the same game otherwise. This also means that Disgaea: Hour of Darkness, Disgaea: Afternoon of Darkness and Disgaea DS should all be merged.

"all the advance games include Mario Bros., though.  I don't think they constitute compilations.  Technically, that'd make Tekken 5 a compilation, because it includes the arcade versions of Tekken 1, 2, and 3.  and any other game that includes a previous version as well."

all versions of FF4 can be put together for sure.
but if the differences that lordandrew cited in supermario advance 2 and the snes version are really that significant there should be something special for it...
maybe a sub wiki page within the super mario 2 page?

Er well, I never said they were too significant. Like I said earlier, I really could go either way. But it does include some minor level design modifications, removed multiplayer, and Mario and Luigi both playable with ( I believe ) control differences depending on who you choose. Plus Mario Bros., which was not included in the original Super Mario World.

I don't know if that's significant enough to justify a separate page, but it's something to consider.

Look, the main wiki page is not meant to be a walkthrough. If enemies have different spawn points or whatever, that stuff should go in a FAQ (for which we shall have a section soon).

So Super Mario Advance 2 and Super Mario World should also share the same page IMO. All Super Mario Advance games and Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga include Mario Bros. I don't think it's necessary to count them as compilations. You can just link to the Mario Bros. page for an explanation on the game.

"Ports and remakes, though, should generally share the same page. Only when it's a complete "re-imagining" or whatever of an old game like The Bard's Tale should it get its own page. This means all FFIV games should share one page. Sure, the DS version has some nifty new 3D graphics, but it's the same game otherwise. This also means that Disgaea: Hour of Darkness, Disgaea: Afternoon of Darkness and Disgaea DS should all be merged."

so FF4 is settled
supermario 2 is settled

Final fight and final fight guy if there is only a playable caracter missing between them i supposed they shoul be merged
this difference could be noted in the wiki

Okay, well yeah. But then the other Super Mario Advance games should get the same treatment, since they are graphical enhancements, with some modifications, and Mario Bros. added on.

couldn't the title super mario bros (number) advance be added to the aliases?

Final fight and final fight guy if there is only a playable caracter missing between them i supposed they shoul be merged
this difference could be noted in the wiki"

"Okay, well yeah. But then the other Super Mario Advance games should get the same treatment, since they are graphical enhancements, with some modifications, and Mario Bros. added on."

"couldn't the title super mario bros (number) advance be added to the aliases?"

Judging from the posts I've seen in this forum, Final Fight Guy has already been merged a while ago. Did anyone want to debate that one, or can we just assume a unanimous "merge"?

merge it

edit: should we put final fight guy in the aliases for final fight?

"merge it

edit: should we put final fight guy in the aliases for final fight?"

Huh? I thought this topic was dead for sure... Anyway...
So what should we base our decisions on? As I see it there are a couple of things that one could argue makes two games similar:
Gameplay=If the basic game concept and ways how the game functions are similar or identical (the Genesis NHL games). Thus if a game functions in a noticeably different way than another they are the not same game.
Code=They are almost identical in their programming, only difference is done in order to make necessary change in order to make a game work better or at all (Street Fighter 2 versions). Thus if a lot of code (ignoring translation information) is needed to be changed in order to turn one version into another they are the not same game. (might be tricky for us to check though in most cases)
Graphical=The graphics are virtually identical, if downgrade the closest approximation possible to fit system (conversations in general). Thus if you can't IMMIDIETLY recognise the game in question from screenshots as a version of another game, assuming you're familiar with one of them, they are not the same game.
Level design=The level are to as big degree as possible exactly the same (arcade ports). Thus if you can't use a walkthrough for another system to navigate a level it is not the same game.
Storyline=A broad stroke outline of two games are the same they are the same game (Disgaea versions). Thus if you can't transfer a broad story outline to another version and have it fit perfectly they are not the same game.
Features=A game has the same modes and features as another game (same gen multi-platform titles). Thus if a game does not have the exact same game modes they are not the same game.

There might very well be aspect I've forgotten but that's the gist of it. We need to decide which of these we should take into concideration and where to draw the line for all of them. And we have to be consistent. We can't have FF4 and FF4DS merged and at the same time keep Star Ocean and it's remake seperate. And we need to decide this early on. What do when priorotize and what do we overlook.

Ah right, the Star Ocean remakes... I forgot about those. Well, the overhaul certainly seems a lot bigger than in FFIV (especially for the first SO), but I haven't played them, so I can't say for sure

I would probably have Tales of Destiny for PS1 and its PS2 remake share the same page, though. The dungeon layouts are exactly the same. It usually just pans the camera to the side of your character so it becomes a side-scroller while you make your way through the corridors. But a walkthrough for the original game is quite useful in the remake. Graphically though, it does look very different. And the battle system also recieved a major upgrade. It is a remake after all.

If we can't make exceptions for specific games, and feel not every remake should share a page with the original, we'll just have to give every remake its own page. Ports like FFIV Advance and Chrono Trigger DS should definitely share a page with the original, though. Even if they had a few features added.

Then what about my favorite example (I've atleast mentioned it 10 times already in different topics) which is Super Street Fighter 2 and Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo... How could anyone argue ever that these game deserves separate entries when FFIV doesn't? Or regular Street Fighter 2 and Street Fighter 2 Turbo. I really don't think the GB staff would go for merging those games ever, but don't think anyone can argue in what way they are MORE different than FFIV and FFIVDS.

For example, if Street Fighter 2 when through the exact same visual update that FFIV did recently (including things like 3D graphics and EX style 3D effects and an appropriate amount of minor additions) everyone and their grandma would argue that this is a completely different game.

And we can't really make exceptions because that will just create further discussions and a lot of crankyness... Maybe the easiest thing would be to think of it like this, if one labels a game as a port it should be merged, if one labels it a remake it should get its own page. Would create some redundancy sure, but atleast I think most people can wrap their head around that and accept it.

EDIT: I'd just like to add that It wouldn't solve all problems sure, I mean, a lot of the EA sports series are essentially rereleases with a new player database, and different gen versions of the "same" title do function completely different but it would solve alot of situations in one fell swoop.

I think FFIV is fine the way it is. Like others have said, it's essentially the same, the only major difference - at least to my knowledge - being the graphical overhaul, which can simply be put in an extra paragraph.

One example for a split would be Sonic the hedgehog 2. Although the page accommodates both versions (8-bit and 16-bit) on the master system and mega drive respectively, the two games are vastly different - having different stories, levels, and gameplay mechanics such as the charge up spin dash thing.

Final Fight Discussion: Final Fight Guy has been removed, so that should not be a problem anymore.

Super Mario World Discussion: As long as it was released on a different platform, and has any sort of change from the first game, it is its own game. Like how Conkers Bad Fur Day is its own game, as well as Conker: Live and Reloaded. Although that had many more changes. (Keep as is)

Final Fantasy 4 for GBA: Make it a new page, because it has new features. (Split)

Final Fantasy 4 for DS: New page, because new features. (Split)

I believe Final Fantasy IV has already decided to stay as merged, but just in case it hasn't, it really should since the main differences between the DS and the other versions are graphics, voice acting, mini-games, and some slight change in dialogue. Not a terrible lot to make them significantly different.

How about the layout of levels for those who has played FFIV games. Are they identical (like a left turn in the SNES game is a left turn in the DS game)? And are the game mechanics exactly identical (ignoring perhaps things like small adjustments in damage calculations and such)? Are there no new areas of the game and does everything play out the same way in both games (meaning is the storyline the same, dialogue and plot is not relevant for this)? If the answer to all those things are yes then I have to reconsider my stance on this.

I previously posed a question what should be taken into account when judging if a game is the same or different. I don't think I really got an answer for that but my stance is that these things are the important ones: Game mechanics, in-game level layout/design and storyline. If ALL those are the virtually the same (NOT only similar), then two games should be considered the same game in my opinion. I only mentioned graphics, code and features cause some may think that these are important at times and I wanted to see what others thought. Can people get behind this?

"How about the layout of levels for those who has played FFIV games. Are they identical (like a left turn in the SNES game is a left turn in the DS game)? And are the game mechanics exactly identical (ignoring perhaps things like small adjustments in damage calculations and such)? Are there no new areas of the game and does everything play out the same way in both games (meaning is the storyline the same, dialogue and plot is not relevant for this)? If the answer to all those things are yes then I have to reconsider my stance on this.

I previously posed a question what should be taken into account when judging if a game is the same or different. I don't think I really got an answer for that but my stance is that these things are the important ones: Game mechanics, in-game level layout/design and storyline. If ALL those are the virtually the same (NOT only similar), then two games should be considered the same game in my opinion. I only mentioned graphics, code and features cause some may think that these are important at times and I wanted to see what others thought. Can people get behind this?"

I've gone ahead and copied the content from the Super Mario Advance and Super Mario Advance 2 articles to the appropriate articles.

Seems like FFIV is one of those annoying fringe games. Probably need to play it myself first and seeing as I don't have a DS and DS emulation sucks big time that won't happen anytime soon.

FFIV has already been decided. It will stay separated, due to the fact of Brad's review and among other things.

Stay separated? Looks pretty merged to me...

deleted