Talk:Silent Hill: Shattered Memories

Developer
Developer is Climax not Knami, and the magazine was Nintendo Power, not Official Nintendo Magazine or whatever (the cited link says this too).VatoFirme (talk) 17:21, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, Climax is lame and has yet to update their own site to reflect ths. --Lenin and McCarthy |  (Complain here) 17:27, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Spin-off
Why exactly is it considered a spin-off and not in the main series? It's basically a remake of Silent Hill 1 with the addition of being customized to the player which is appropriate considering the realm of Silent Hill appears different to each character even in the main story. Kiwisoup (talk) 02:04, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The main Silent Hill series incorporates elements from SH1 (Harry, Alessa, Dahlia, Lisa, Kaufman, Samael, and various locations) which are almost certainly going to be changed in Shattered Memories. We cannot yet say for certain whether or not SHSM will even fit into the established series at all. Gustave the Steel (talk) 18:18, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: blanking the page
The section heading is "Plot." Hmm, I wonder what it could contain. Perhaps... the plot? Yeah. Reverted. Takua108 (talk) 06:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Differences between versions
I think there should be a small section on the main page explaining the differences between the Wii, PSP and PS2 versions. For instance on the Wii version, you use the Wiimote to solve puzzles, listen to the character's mobile phone, etc. Basically, these are minor differences unique to each version. And even graphically. On the Wii there are larger draw distances, more detailed textures and visual effects that are missing in the PS2 or PSP versions. Some buildings and enemies in these versions have either been moved around or eliminated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pikminister (talk • contribs) 22:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Sales figures
SM apparently failed to chart in America. Any other info? --Lenin and McCarthy |  (Complain here) 23:41, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * 5th on PS2 and 11th on Wii in the UK. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/uk-charts-heavy-rain-is-number-one --Mika1h (talk) 17:15, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Is the source posted by Lenin and McCarthy reliable? Is this the official site of Nintendo? Hula Hup (talk) 17:05, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Third party. Your call on reliability. --Lenin and McCarthy |  (Complain here) 18:06, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * No, no, I just asked if it's the official Nintendo site out of curiosity. Hula Hup (talk) 18:47, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Suggested sources

 * For "Gameplay" and "Plot": Yes check.svg Hula Hup (talk) 00:03, 19 October 2011 (UTC)


 * For "Reception": Yes check.svg Hula Hup (talk) 21:18, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

. The ref describes the game as "one of the best PS2 horror games", as a "horror gem" and as "one of the most underrated horror titles on the console". It says that the PS2 port "occasionally suffered framerate issues". Not sure if the bit "fans take issue with the fact it isn't terribly scary" could be included at all. Anima Sola (talk) 18:59, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Issues before a potential GAN

 * The lead needs expansion, as it lacks the key gameplay,Yes check.svg development,Yes check.svg and reception elements,Yes check.svg and a brief mention of the game's endings.Yes check.svg Sources are required here per WP:LEAD.
 * In "Gameplay", would drawing a comparison between puzzles be excessive? For example, comparing a complicated puzzle requiring much thinking to a simple puzzle. I don't know.
 * "Development" also needs expansion, as is somewhat scrawny; check out this interviewYes check.svg I found months ago and also thisYes check.svg and thisYes check.svg (just quickly scanned them, so don't know if they contain stuff already covered, though they have multiple pages, so chances are there's something good in them). If the section's enlarged enough to make space, a free image could be added, perhaps one of Yamaoka.Yes check.svg Also, what about a sound sample representative of the game's atmosphere or songs in "Audio"?
 * Source 44 may be unreliable.Yes check.svg
 * "Reception" needs to be expanded, too, to include other negative comments, if there are any, of course, and the game's featuring on best-game lists. Here are some reviews and a list, apart from the IGN list posted in the topic above by me (again, note that I haven't thoroughly checked all of them, so accept my apologies if any just repeat what's already written in the section without adding anything new): X mark.svg (which should be cited with Template:Cite video), ,Yes check.svg ,Yes check.svg and Yes check.svg (the latter criticizes the game's checkpoint feature).

Hope I helped and ideas and objections welcome. Hula Hup (talk) 23:03, 22 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "Reception" needs paraphrasing because it contains a large amount of direct speech; quotes should be used sparingly, probably to explain something hard to explain through indirect speech. Hula Hup (talk) 18:43, 29 April 2012 (UTC)


 * More material for "Reception" (also suggested on Silent Hill's talk page by me): Yes check.svg and .Yes check.svg Hula Hup (talk) 16:42, 1 May 2012 (UTC)


 * For "Development":, ,Yes check.svg ,X mark.svg .X mark.svg Hula Hup (talk) 19:22, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * First of all, wonderful work tracking down all those super helpful RSs!
 * Lead: I respectfully disagree. It says that "The verifiability policy advises that material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, and quotations, should be supported by an inline citation. Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material." At this point, I can't really see anything that would be (or is likely to be) challenged. Maybe the reception elements? Everything is sourced later on, anyhow. Perhaps I'm overlooking something?
 * Gameplay: You mean like a mention that there's a range of puzzle difficulty besides the simple key-finding ones? Does the example give the wrong impression? Hm. What does anyone else think?
 * Audio: Honestly, I'm having a really difficult time finding RSs for the audio section. And yes, the credits ending scene can be used to cite that McGlynn was a co-voice director. Yet, I can't help wondering what she meant by "one of a kind bonus stuff"?
 * Reception: Is always the most difficult part... I don't want to overemphasize the opinions of Videogamer.com, and the GameTrailers video review is (I think) just a video version of the written review. Not to mention that Source 3 is really vague about what the reviewer/staff member found scary about SHSM. Kaguya-chan (talk) 17:20, 23 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you, thank you! I'm really happy to help. :) This article is yours, I've done minor things.
 * Lead: I see. Well, it seems that the reception bit is indeed probably the only challengable part, as it describes personal opinions. Cases regarding personal POVs are very sensitive, as we know.
 * Gameplay: I meant a comparison like this, but now I realise it'd possibly be excessive detail. Referring to the puzzle difficulty selection is also excessive detail, maybe? I don't know. According to WikiProject Video games, the section should contain only the gameplay's most prominent traits.
 * Audio: I'll watch the credits scene and see what I can do, I think it indeed cites her voice directing work.
 * Reception: I agree with you that it's the trickiest. It needs a lot of attention, even a minor wording mistake could make an opinion appear as a fact. OK, we omit the GameTrailers video. I haven't watched it, but I trust you. You mean that no more VideoGamer content should be added? Link 6 pans the checkpoint feature; some more criticism other than the one targeting the game's duration should be added to avoid making the article overemphasising the positively received elements. What do you believe? If you plan to continue working on the section, remember the IGN list far above in "Suggested sources", it's kinda like the Gamasutra top 10 overlooked games list, as its subtitle reveals ("forgotten Wii gems").
 * Is there any source that you believe adds nothing/repeats what's already covered? Hula Hup (talk) 16:04, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * For "Reception": (on an award won by the game for its audio). Site reliable per Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources.Yes check.svg Hula Hup (talk) 16:44, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * In "Audio", I guess the track listing table serves no actual purpose. It is unencyclopedic trivia which doesn't help readers better understand the section, probably needs to be removed per WP:WHIM.Yes check.svg Hula Hup (talk) 01:25, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


 * After a marvelous copyedit by Baffle gab1978, it looks like just the direct quote issue is left. Wonderful progress, everyone! Let's see. Gameplay, release, & plot are devoid of direct quotes, and there are a few in development, but there are more in reception, most notably the 1st and 2nd paragraphs. Hmm. I'll take a look at the ones in Development, they seem like they can be paraphrased.


 * Also, we have Harry being referred to as "Harry" and "Mason". I think we should pick one for consistency. I don't really mind either way, but don't the other articles call him "Harry"? Kaguya-chan (talk) 00:22, 4 September 2012 (UTC)


 * There's also a minor difficulty: some IGN references feature a lowercased value ("ign.com") in their "Work" field and certain refs don't have a filled "Publisher" field.Yes check.svg Indeed he's referred to by his first name in the other SH articles. Only some finishing touches left before we can submit for GA review. A major expansion and clean-up has occured over the last months, so there're many chances that it'll pass, I guess. Hula Hup (talk) 17:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I've just nominated it and wish good luck. Hula Hup (talk) 13:49, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikilinks
Several words and phrases in the article are jargon entirely unknown or unclear to readers who are not familiar with certain fields. Examples are terms related to video games ("first-person", "video game graphics", "video game producer", "game demo"), psychology ("psychotherapy", "psychological test"), fiction ("frame story", "zombie"), and film ("voice acting"). We should also always bear in mind that a vast portion of the readers are foreigners and/or non-native speakers of the English language, an example being me. On second thought, I realised some links were indeed excessive, like "text messaging" and "psychiatrist", but some should desperately link to their explanation. Thank you and please forgive me for not starting a discussion here from the beginning. Hula Hup (talk) 23:34, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I generally agree with this statement, but not necessarily with the examples provided. Problem is when an article is using way too many wikilinks (per WP:OVERLINK), like having a link every two or three words, jeopardizes readability. If we had a wiki link for every single "jargon" word in every single game article, no article would be readable, so articles in my opinion should be handled on a case by case basis. The editor should make a selection of which words better deserve a linking; these should be either closely game-related (to the specific game), or rather obscure terms/jargon. Which means if I had to make a choice, in an overwhelmed with links article, I would probably leave terms like 'zombie', 'voice acting', 'psychotherapy' unlinked, cause the 95 out of 100 readers are familiar with these terms. Worst case scenario, if you are among the few that does not comprehend their meaning, there is a wikipedia search box. Because if we linked them too, one, then, would debate that other words should have been also linked; 'gameplay', 'puzzle', 'exploration', 'installment', 'development', 'atmosphere', 'platform', 'profiling', 'interaction' and I could go on forever. I should also note that a link should appear only once inside the article. So, as I said, I generally agree, but we should distinguish which terms are indeed closely-related to the article and useful to link, and if they are too many to make the article hard to read. Feel free to add any links, as long as they are not excessive in the ways described. Thank you for the co-operation to make these articles even better. Punkalyptic (talk) 12:12, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The guideline says that, if helpful for readers, a link can be repeated at the first occurence after the lead. Hm, except "puzzle", "exploration", and "atmosphere", which are very common everyday words, yes you are right. Let me list the jargon I think are the murkiest to readers without knowledge of fields mentioned above or of older age: "ports", "framing", "first-person", "over-the-shoulder", "zombie", "baseball bat" (the sport is highly popular in the States and less in other territories, like Europe, where soccer is the dominant sport, and could also very easily be confused with rugby union, a sport popular in Anglophone countries, according to the respective article; etymology doesn't help too ("base" + "ball"), in contrast with the cases of football or handball, where one can at least understand that they're played with the feet and hands, respectively. Thank you. Hula Hup (talk) 18:12, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

B-Class assessment
Following a suggestion on my talk page, I am doing a B-Class assessment on the article.


 * Referencing and citation - looks good
 * Coverage and accuracy - looks good criterion met
 * Structure - nice work
 * Grammar and style - no errors or typos anywhere
 * Supporting materials - looks perfect
 * Accessibility - very accessible

Hope this helps. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:16, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

***SPOILER ALERT***
This first paragraph should be edited (by someone more skilled than myself) to remove its plot spoiler.

THE FIRST DESCRIPTIVE PARAGRAPH IN A GAME OR MOVIE'S WIKI SHOULD NOT SPOIL THE PLOT TWISTS OF THE ENDINGS!!!

Someone please fix this.

As for all of you, like myself, who'd like to play the game before having this ruined, AVOID THE FIRST PARAGRAPH! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dee Bellwether (talk • contribs) 20:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * There is a guideline on spoilers in articles WP:SPOILER. I think that would be beneficial to read that. Also, we do not need any disclaimers. If you need help, there's always the immensely helpful help desk for newcomers. Hope that helps, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:31, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

A-class to-do list
Okay, moving the list from the GAN page to here. Can anyone think of anything else to add? Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 18:21, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Add sales ✅
 * Replace screenshot ✅
 * Ref look-over and possible clean-up for consistency
 * Re-read to make sure article is understandable
 * Add voice actors (perhaps?)


 * Per WP:GAMECRUFT, inclusion of the voice actors is appropriate only if "mention of the actors is an important factor of the article" or if the "cast is particularly notable, such as actors reprising their roles in a video game translation of a film." I'm sure everyone agrees that the most crucial point here is the addition of the sales. I'll look for screenshots. Hula Hup (talk) 21:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

For "Reception":. Hula Hup (talk) 15:39, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

For "Development": (some interesting info on the absence of load times and pre-order sales). Hula Hup (talk) 20:50, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

For "Reception": (best-of list also mentioning the game's low sales towards the end). Hula Hup (talk) 20:57, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

For the same section:. Hula Hup (talk) 21:35, 14 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Sources 1-3 been added. :) Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 17:55, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Silent Hill: Shattered Memories. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/66WsF8jnt?url=http://www.1up.com/reviews/silent-hill-shattered-memories-review to http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3177239&p=44

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:02, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Silent Hill: Shattered Memories. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121028162655/http://au.gamespot.com/news/silent-hill-composer-departs-konami-report-6241873 to http://au.gamespot.com/news/silent-hill-composer-departs-konami-report-6241873
 * Added tag to http://au.gamespot.com/wii/action/silenthillshatteredmemories/news.html?sid=6259095
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20120716131508/http://palgn.com.au/nintendo-wii/15787/silent-hill-shattered-memories-review/ to http://palgn.com.au/nintendo-wii/15787/silent-hill-shattered-memories-review/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:01, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Silent Hill: Shattered Memories is on PC
Shattered Memories is on PC. Here's the Steam Page: Shattered Memories Fujimotofan235 (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2024 (UTC)