Talk:Eroge

What's going on here?
it says "In English, eroge are mistakenly called hentai games in keeping with the English slang definition of hentai. This is sometimes shortened to H game, which is also never used in Japan."

but "Hentai Games" redirects to this page...
 * Where would you rather it redirect to? Ashibaka tock 21:00, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


 * That contradicts the information concerning the terms "H geemu" and "erogee" in the Japanese article. Also, according to the Japanese article the word is "erogee", not "eroge". The word "erogee" (エロゲー) makes more sense considering the usual rules for Japanese abbreviations.
 * 05 September 2006

Eroge wrongly lists Kanon as the first game to go anime
This is in fact contradicted by the previous paragraph's game, To Heart wich beat the eroge to anime conversion by several years. At least according to the articles linked too and also as can be clearly seen by anyone who has seen the anime in question.

I don't feel upto editing the page myself but thought this should be adressed.


 * I don't see any mention of them being the first game gone anime. In fact, neither is the first eroge to become an anime, off the top of my head I can name Dōkyūsei as being an eroge-to-anime conversion before To Heart. _dk 10:21, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Merge

 * Oppose - Too specialized and actually a wide genre of its own, as far as I know. Should keep its own article MadMaxDog 09:16, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above. _dk 09:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose per MadMaxDog. Cattus 16:50, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Approve These are games whose basic premise is to get to the porn just like Adult Video Games. There is basically no difference from this and all other adult games aside from the fact that these are mostly depicting cartoons rather than people. If I am wrong then please list some key differences here. Klichka (talk) 01:47, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose. "It contains only about 7 brief erotic scenes in a sentimental story the size of a long novel (an all-ages version was also released afterward)." There's more to eroge than getting to the porn, and so they deserve their own article. — PyTom (talk) 02:55, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Well-knownness
Is Well-knownness NPOV? How is well-knownness determined? There are some games that I and everyone I know kows about, but aren't listed in here. On the other hand, a few of the games listed I've not heard of, even though I am an avid eroge player. -Afker 05:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hm... the obvious answer is WP:NOTE. I would argue that having the big list of games in this article doesn't really contribute much. Perhaps we should separate the English-translated games into a subcategory of Category:H games, and then get rid of this list (and some of the related lists). — PyTom 07:40, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Agree. With between 300~400 new eroge each year, "notability" is really hard to be NPOV about, unless you go by sales rankings done by Japanese Magazines or something. -Afker 07:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Just a suggestion, one can probably use sales rankings as a measure of well-knownness. A summary of past sales rankings: http://jbbs.livedoor.jp/bbs/read.cgi/computer/15097/1098155368/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.25.118.31 (talk) 02:08, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

New Link Request
I am the webmaster for The Virtual Sex Review and I would like to link my site here which I believe is quite relavent to the topic of Eroge. The url is www.thevirtualsexreview.com and the site focuses on reviewing interactive sex and erotic themed games including those in the genre of Eroge and Hentai. For example, there are reviews for Beauty 3D and Hentai 3D which are both Eroge games. Besides reviews, the site pulls in RSS feeds on the topic and features forums (although not many posts there yet).

I have seen other "sex game" review sites linked here or in other appropriate articles.

Thoughts and opinions?

The fast e 01:37, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

The history part of the article contradicts itself, the kanon anime is from 2002, while the To Heart article lists its anime version as being from 1999. So either that article is wrong (it isn't as far as I know) or the conclusion is wrong.

To Heart is as far as I know the first ero-game to anime transition. I could edit it, but would first like to know the reasons for the original text, is the author basing the claim because To Heart doesn't count? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.80.196.236 (talk) 10:53, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Classification
Is To Heart really erotic in nature? It's not marketed that way and the anime` shops never put it in the Hentai section. I haven't seen it myself, but the reviews I've read of this series never discuss it as an eroge series. Silverstarseven (talk) 17:11, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I've seen To Heart, and it is NOT an eroge anime. Whether the game was or not, I don't know, but the anime series IS NOT. So, I fail to see the point of an eroge -> anime progression if the process removes the erotic element which is characteristic of eroge. Silverstarseven (talk) 22:56, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

It is. To Heart is probably one of the most famous hgames in that era.

PC-8801
Eroge: "Competing systems included the Sharp X1, Fujitsu FM-7, MSX, and NEC PC-8801. NEC was behind its competitors in terms of hardware (with only 16 colors and no sound support) and needed a way to regain control of the market. Thus came the erotic game." But, in NEC PC-8801: "For its time, the PC-8801 had a high display resolution, but could only display 8 out of 512 colors simultaneously. ... Its sound-producing capabilities were also more advanced than other machines of the time." So, was it really "behind" or not? -- NZeemin (talk) 18:28, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

RapeLay
Rapelay doesn't really belong in the hostory section as currently written, it's only notable for the controversy it has caused recently (several years after release).

I suggest that the paragraph should either be cut to a one sentance description of the game with a second sentance about the controversy or removed altogether.

78.86.202.87 (talk) 18:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Doesn't belong? As far as eroge games go, I think its one of the more notable ones. What makes you think it isn't? -- ErgoSum • talk • trib  22:31, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * As IP said, the game only belongs in the history section for the controversy it stirred. Massive restrictions are being put in place on the eroge industry because some British rag drew some very unwanted attention to RapeLay. The game itself is pretty ordinary eroge material - it's not a breakthrough, or "historic", in any regard. So I agree with the IP that the description of the game should be removed and replaced with a paragraph about the controversy and the restrictions. _dk (talk) 22:46, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * It wasn't notable until it caused controversy (this year, almost three years after release) and isn't representative of the genre as a whole as it's much more extreme than most eroge. The current paragraph is a graphic description of the game and makes no mention of the controversy.
 * Rapelay was not in the top 20 best selling eroge games for 2006, 2007 or 2008
 * Also notable would be Tsukihime by Type-Moon which achieved huge success despite being a Doujin game or anything else by Type-Moon, Key or Leaf.
 * 78.86.202.87 (talk) 22:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add reliably sourced information from those games. But I think RapeLay should stay. It gained notoriety in the United States and the UK, its the only Eroge game I've ever heard of. I'm not exactly a game freak, so I suppose I'm in the majority of people when I say I had never heard of a Japanese sex/rape game until RapeLay. Regardless of the sales, this game was notable for its reaction from politicians and other interest groups. By all means, expand the article if you want, but you shouldn't delete relevant facts. -- ErgoSum • talk • trib  23:31, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Because its know in the west and should stay shows systemic bias. Yea it should be noted in a historic context, ie the game created a contriversy and backlash, but just because you heard of it doesn't mean its the most notable eroge out there. A short paragraph stating what the contriversy stemmed from actually would cover the basic premise of the game, if the title wasn't clear enough. Leave more descrption to the RapeLay article. 陣 内 Jinnai 03:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Its not systemic bias to mention that this game created controversy. Edit the entry if you must, but it deserves at least a mention. A game about rape is pretty notable, regardless of the fact this controversy occurs in the west. Conforming this to a strictly "eastern viewpoint" is also biased, as the article is supposed to cover a world-wide perspective. -- ErgoSum • talk • trib  00:34, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No, I never said it shouldn't be mentioned. It is notable because it created a great contrivers that had reunification for EOCS. However, saying its more notable than most eroge games is giving undue weight to the title. 陣 内 Jinnai 16:24, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Well I never said that, I just said it was one of the "more notable" ones. I realize you may be into these games, but most people who are unfamiliar with these games would consider RapeLay a pretty controversial game, even if its no big deal in Japan. There defintely should be a mention of the game's ranking, although I'm not sure if you could come up with anything more specific than it not being in the top 20. I would have no problem mentioning that. The article is pretty thin, it just takes up more space because it is lacking in other areas. If this were a complete article, this short mention would barely stick out. -- ErgoSum • talk • trib  20:46, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * There. I fixed it the entry. It still mentions RapeLay and what it is essentially. If someone wants to know more, they can click the wikilink. I also removed the "underage" part as that is original research since the ages aren't specified. You'll have to find an independant reliable reviewer to state they are underage since EOCS passed regulations on age restrictions in games several years prior. 陣 内 Jinnai 00:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That is fine, you are right the ages aren't exactly specified. This is an acceptable compromise IMO. -- ErgoSum • talk • trib  01:14, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Notability
I don't see any evidence, or even assertion of notability. Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 20:57, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Look in Japanese. If you want to bring this to an AfD, I can assure you it would be kept, likely with WP:SNOWBALL grounds. Just because you cannot read Japanese, doesn't mean sources don't exist. 陣 内 Jinnai 21:08, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I'm looking in the article. That's where the evidence of notability should be, and it isn't there; that's what the notability tag signalled.  If you know of sources, add them -- speculation here is not useful.  Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 21:18, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't have to. That is not how wikipedia works. If I find one, I might add it, but unless you bring this up to an AfD and for a legitimate reason WP:IMPERFECT says otherwise. A topic is not unnotable just because it lacks sources. That is not how things work. 陣 内 Jinnai 21:22, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, that's exactly how things work. The common theme in the notability guidelines is that there must be verifiable objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention to support a claim of notability.  Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 16:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Again, that doesn't require the sources be in the article itself. Finally, WP:N is a guideline, not a policy. Again, I'm not saying this article shouldn't be referenced though. 陣 内 Jinnai 19:24, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Verifiability, which is a policy, states that "any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation". Your argument that the verifiable sources required to demonstrate notability need not be cited seems quite incorrect.  However, if you believe that such sources exist already, by all means point to them.  Oh, and per WP:NONENG policy, When citing a source in a different language, without quotations, the original and its translation should be provided if requested by other editors.   Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

H-game: Atlach-Nacha
Apparently, the following used to be in this article (and remains in searchable archives):
 * "Japanese eroge, also known as H-games or hentai games, ..."

I read the discussion at the top of this talk page about "H-game / hentai" being removed because of something from a Japanese source. However, on en.WP. terminology should reflect English usage.

Anyway, I'm trying to find out what the term 'H-game' refers to in order to clarify a section on an article that I'm working on. Frankly, I know almost nothing about this stuff. If anybody could clarify the following sentence for the article, please do so - hopefully with a cite, (it currently doesn't have a reference, and might be removed otherwise). There is also mention of the "Visual novel" Atlach-Nacha, which I might have mistakenly sorted into the 'Literature' section - is this 'Visual novel' the same as the 'H-game'? —From: Cultural depictions of spiders
 * "Atlach-Nacha is an H-game centered on a spider demon disguising herself as a human woman."

~Thanks - any assistance appreciated, I can't explain something to the readers if I don't understand it myself. ~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 04:18, 6 December 2012 (UTC) See also: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games ~Feel free to delete this. ~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 04:47, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

possible source
http://www.japanator.com/japanese-eroge-can-do-wonders-for-the-game-industry-11165.phtml

--Atlantima (talk) 23:53, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * What's with that "blog" style of writings, either way, it's works. It's on "pass/passable" score on my own view as a source for articles.Ald™ ¬_¬™ 13:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Citations needed?
This article clearly requests "This article needs additional citations for verification" but fails to mark the necessary areas that require citation's, I believe for clarification, such areas lacking information or verifiable article's must be marked clearly with a (citation needed) marker. 66.189.173.57 (talk) 09:57, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Katawa Shoujo
>Katawa Shoujo >エロゲー I seriously hope you guys don't think this is true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.196.144.37 (talk) 04:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:37, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Kogalcensored.png

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:06, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Kogalcensored.png