Forum:Handling Warcraft III: Reforged

From Wowpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Village pump → Handling Warcraft III: Reforged


There are already questions on how to handle the coming Reforged game, as seen on The Prophecy (WC3 demo). So here are a few questions on how you guys think we should handle it:

  • Overriding old content: Should Reforged content override the WC3 one? As in, override all the old icons, .gifs, etc. with ones from Reforged? Personal opinion: nooooope, let's preserve the old files as they are.
  • Chronological order? Should WC3 content appear before or after Reforged content? Personal opinion: IMO WC3 should appear before, but that's not something I want to waste time arguing over.
  • Infoboxes: should we show only Reforged content? Or WC3 and Reforged content, as they do on Starcraft wikia? That would require some programming, I guess. Also, if we show both, which one shows up first? Personal opinion: I like how they handle it on Starcraft wikia tbh.

--Xporc (talk) 22:37, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Personal opinion:
1 - nooooope, let's preserve the old files as they are.
2 - Personal opinion: IMO WC3 should appear before, but that's not something I want to waste time arguing over.
3 - I like how they handle it on Starcraft wikia tbh. --Xporc (talk) 22:37, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
My opinions:
  1. No, rather keep all the images separate. But this can be talked about and debated on whether to replace the old ones.
  2. Reforged content first, original after.
  3. That's the plan I'm going to do over at Starpedia. Reforged content first, because it is the latest and most people would probably like to see that.
Surafbrov T / C / P 22:43, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
We already lack a lot of Warcraft III content as it is. We do not need to remove anything. I would rather two separate page for larger things like missions (because they are not just being reskinned), and then one page with two infoboxes for the units. Maybe the infoboxes can be in tabs or something.--SWM2448 00:36, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Yea, I agree with SWM. — Surafbrov T / C / P 00:53, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
1 - I don't tink there's any reason to delete the WC3 files ?
2 - Reforged (pictures, sections..) should definitely appear before. That is already what we do whenever a model is updated, we use the new updated model first and put the old, ugly one after it, same for when a character is updated, or an object, or a zone, or a city, and so on. The most recent is the most relevant. In cases where the content is not the same (say a mission is completely different) we might go with split pages.
3 - See my answer to #2 for when the content is really different. As for pics in infoboxes, I have wondered before if it was possible to have alternate infobox pictures. It could also be helpful for when a character or something appears differently (say Genn in both human and worgen form). -- MyMindWontQuiet 00:55, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
We could put a multi-tab infobox in. A few other wikis use this, and it'd be really useful for stuff like Genn and other worgen/the upcoming WC3 replacements.--Berenal (talk) 00:59, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
I thought at first, that simply using a "Versions" template might be enough, but with new maps being vastly different, seperate pages might be a better solution. And keep everything I say! I would agree on having reforged content first, in cases where pages are shared, although it's not something I have a strong opinion on. PeterWind (talk) 07:50, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Absolutely agree that we should keep all the old files, but that Reforged content in terms of images and lore should overall be prioritized on the wiki. For example, in cases where a Reforged plot point retcons an original WC3 one, lore pages would favor the Reforged version, with the original WC3 version and any potential contradictions being noted in a Notes section. Similarly, on lore pages for units like raider, we should favor using images of the the Reforged icons and models, with the old files being moved further down the page, to a Gallery if necessary. I agree that game unit pages should preferably have two infoboxes, or alternatively infoboxes where users can switch tabs between the original and Reforged versions. However, for campaign missions, I agree with SWM that it might be easier to have completely split pages for all of the missions due to all the changed dialogue and new content in the Reforged versions. In other words, instead of listing both WC3 and Reforged information on The Culling (WC3 Human), we'd split it into [[The Culling (WC3)]] and [[The Culling (Reforged)]] or something along those lines. However, cutscenes and cinematics are probably fine to have as a single page, like the way it's currently handled on The Prophecy (WC3 demo). -- IconSmall TrollDeathKnight Male.gif DeludedTroll (talkcontribs) 10:27, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Yea, completely agree with DT on this as well. Cinematics, cutscenes, etc. all just one article. Missions separate for Reforged and original. — Surafbrov T / C / P 12:49, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Agreed, though it could depend on the mission ? If it's identical in WC3 & WC3:R or almost, there might not be a need to have 2 separate pages. -- MyMindWontQuiet 15:27, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
I don't know about that, but it would make logical sense to not make an entirely identical article in that case if it is the same in both games. — Surafbrov T / C / P 15:36, 8 November 2018 (UTC)


Alright, wasn't expecting to have this much answers, that's nice. So to summarize:

  • We're not deleting or overwriting any Warcraft III content. That means we'll have to be cautious about people eventually uploading new pics over old ones.
  • Seems I'm the only one wanting to keep WIII stuff before Reforged content, so we'll take majority and have Reforged content in priority then. However, see the next point.
  • Shared pages with tabbed infobox content for everything but some missions. However since we also want Reforged content to take priority this will necessitate a huge amount of work if we want to keep up consistency, because that mainly means that for infoboxes, we need to retake Reforged screenshots of everything. Can't have Reforged take priority in infoboxes if we have like 10 unit pages with up-to-date Reforged content and 60 other unit pages with WIII content. Is everyone aware and agreeing with that? Xporc (talk) 12:28, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
It's a wiki, it's not an issue if it takes a while to get all the Reforged content up and running and if for some time WC3 content is still more numerous than Reforged. All will be done in time. -- MyMindWontQuiet 12:30, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

What about mission/story images such as this should they be moved to their mission page (here for the example image) and a new image be uploaded as a separate file or should the Reforged images be uploaded over the old mission/story images. I think the former, just questioning do the already made points apply to this type of images. Mrforesttroll (talk) 14:39, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

yeah, that particular picture should be put on the Dissension (WC3 Human) page while a new Reforged pic of the same cutscene should be uploaded and put on the same location instead on Arthas' page.
Now if we see this picture File:Cullingroc.jpg, I think it should be kept on the Culling of Stratholme's page, not just on the WC3 mission one. Because that's a general picture of the event and as such deserve to be kept on the Culling's page.
If we ever make a page about Arthas slaughtering his mercenaries, which is unlikely, we can put back File:ArthasTreachery.jpg there alonside the Reforged version :p Xporc (talk) 15:28, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Lore

What about examples of Reforged reforging the Warcraft canon? I'm split on this topic, because while I feel you can add new stuff to the universe, I don't like the idea of retcons. How will we handle it? What does the official sources say - if anything - can the story of this game be considered a valid retcon? Amargaard (talk) 23:30, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

It'll pretty much be considered the superior one over the original Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos and The Frozen Throne. AFAIK, (from the discussion above) everyone agrees on making Reforged Missions separate from the RoC, TFT, and demo missions. — Surafbrov T / C / P 23:33, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Wowpedia:Neutrality policy. I really hate this change because this is what I felt that the old version was for.--SWM2448 23:34, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes, actually. And that section template was only changed with the rest of them (like the WoW expansions), it might be best to revert that change for WC3. — Surafbrov T / C / P 23:37, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
I believe we have separate WC3 and WC3:Reforged section templates now, so there's no need. As for the lore, it'll probably a case-by-case basis, and the old WC3 lore will probably be moved somewhere else (on the article, e.g the Suramar or Tomb of Sargeras article will use the updated lore but it could make mention of how different it was in Warcraft III in the Notes section), or sometimes removed. -- MyMindWontQuiet 07:53, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Units

Currently designing the template to be used for both original and remastered (so you can switch between the images for the infobox). Will post more updates here. — Surafbrov T / C / P 18:22, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Cheers Xporc (talk) 19:54, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Scratch that, the {{Versions}} can be used instead of applying the tabs to the infobox itself. — Surafbrov T / C / P 17:49, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
Just saw this on Shrine of the Storm page how about this tabber thing for Reforged units? I started with Grunt (Warcraft III). Mrforesttroll (talk) 18:39, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Yea, that is the general idea to start using tabber for the units and buildings. You can also see it in use for Sylvanas Windrunner (Warcraft III). AFAICT, the missions will be handled differently. — Surafbrov T / C / P 19:06, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Actually, I just remembered. {{WC3UnitBox}} was changed to add support for Classic and Reforged images. Since the games will be able to play with each other (players with Classic can be against players with reforged), the stats will be the same no matter. There is no need to have separate infoboxes (unless in the case for Sylvanas Windrunner). — Surafbrov T / C / P 19:10, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Is there any way that an additional image can be added for unit portraits into WC3UnitBox? Mrforesttroll (talk) 19:29, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Don't think those are necessary considering they are essentially a headshot of their model and the unit icons were painted-over portraits. — Surafbrov T / C / P 19:52, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
I agree with Suraf. An image of the icon and the unit model is enough. -- IconSmall TrollDeathKnight Male.gif DeludedTroll (talkcontribs) 07:05, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Unit quotes

Kind of a minor issue, I guess, but since we know from this Game Informer interview that Blizzard will be updating old unit quotes to remove outdated pop culture references and account for new lore, how will we handle the Quotes of Warcraft III pages? Make new, separate pages for the Reforged quotes (e.g. something like Quotes of Warcraft III: Reforged/Orc Horde), or use the existing pages but just add new sections or columns? I'm personally leaning toward the lattermost. -- IconSmall TrollDeathKnight Male.gif DeludedTroll (talkcontribs) 17:29, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm also in favor of the latter. -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 18:16, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
I'd just add columns to the existing page too Xporc (talk) 19:09, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Yeah that should be fine. PeterWind (talk) 21:19, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Ditto. — Surafbrov T / C / P 09:20, 8 May 2019 (UTC)