Talk:Omori (video game)

Removal of second note
In the second sentence of the article’s opening, the note after Sunny’s name says that ‘Sunny’ is merely the protagonist’s default name. However, Omocat themself also refers to the protagonist as Sunny, such as at 5:30, 5:40, 5:43, 10:56, and 11:06, in this stream titled “SUNNY’S BIRTHDAY CELEBRATION STREAM”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFj1IYGqQa0 Given this, I think the note should be removed as it could mislead readers into thinking Sunny’s name isn’t canon or isn’t universally accepted as the protagonist’s name. McDaMastR (talk) 05:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I agree it should be removed. Though I don't think it's hugely misleading, I think it's an incidental detail that doesn't really matter that much, just like let's say the volume controls. Our other JRPG articles such as Mother 3 and Final Fantasy VII don't list it for good reason. ― novov (t   c)  07:22, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I would also support removing it, since it really isn't that important. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Development
Omori was extremely infamous during its development for a lack of developer transparency, which caused fan outrage during development. The game's troubled Kickstarter campaign was characterized by a lack of developer communication, and frustration from fans who were often left in the dark for months on end.

This is, without a doubt, one of Omori's most noteworthy qualities, and I think something reflecting this should be added. I'm including a link to a YouTube video which documents this aspect of the game here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjkEPo9P-OI

The video includes testimonials from various Kickstarter backers of the game, and provides independent research which provides context on the game's troubled development.

As I said: this is objectively one of the most well-known facts about the game's development, and it baffles me that something like this isn't already present in the article. Beaksmccoy (talk) 15:23, 11 March 2024 (UTC)


 * YouTube is not a reliable source. If you can find a reliable source, we can add the information. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:26, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
 * https://cliqist.com/2016/02/03/2-years-200000-omori-kickstarter-communication-still-broken/
 * https://medium.com/super-jump/the-mysterious-allure-of-omori-e1c21bf3c130
 * https://indiegameculture.com/news/omori-dev-omocat-accused-of-worker-exploitation/
 * Hope this is enough Crockpure (talk) 15:07, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Medium is unreliable, and I couldn't find much indicators that the remaining two sources are up to reliable source standards. IGC's about page doesn't seem to show much professional journalism qualifications, and neither does Cliqist's. (Neither of them show up at WikiProject Video games/Sources.) I think the material probably has to be removed, since it documents poorly sourced info about accusations towards living people (see Wikipedia's living people policy). ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 16:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Turns out Cliqist has been considered unreliable in a discussion. Sorry, but I don't think this sourcing is enough for the paragraph's inclusion, especially considering the biographies of living people policy. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 17:05, 12 March 2024 (UTC)