Talk:Superhot

OS naming consistency.
Should the article refer to platform by just their name, or by their name prepended by the name of the company that produced them? I have no preference either way, as long as it's consistent. InternetMeme (talk) 11:14, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Platforms should usually be referred to (per Infobox guidelines) by their unabbreviated names, e.g. "Microsoft Windows" (which is the full name and not just the platform name preceeded by its developer), but "PlayStation 4" (which is the full name without "Sony" in front). The only exception would be "GameCube", as the official name is "Nintendo GameCube", but commonly (WP:COMMONNAME) known as simply "GameCube", hence its article naming, as opposed to the Microsoft Windows case. Some users opt to state that "Microsoft" is just a disambiguator, and a lot of people go with it, but per WP:ARTCON, which I mentioned before, the format used in the article should be kept and not changed over, if there is not a valid reason (e.g. global consensus for a "Microsoft Windows" -> "Windows" or reverse change). So if it said "Microsoft Windows" before, it should stay that way. If the creating users opts for "Windows", then it should be kept that way. Therefore please refrain from changing it. Thanks! Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 12:07, 8 January 2017 (UTC)


 * ""Microsoft Windows" (which is the full name and not just the platform name preceeded by its developer)"


 * It seems to be a huge coincidence that they just happened to choose the word "Microsoft" as part of their platform name, when "Microsoft" also happens to be the name of the developer. Statistically speaking, it seems likely that "Microsoft" is in fact the developer name, as there's something like a 269 chance they chose those letters by coincidence.
 * Are you sure that "Microsoft" isn't really just the name of the developer?
 * InternetMeme (talk) 09:23, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
 * There might even be a greater chance to you should re-read my statement. [""Microsoft Windows" (which is the full name and not just the platform name preceeded by its developer)"]. I'll leave the thinking about your unnecessarily long comment to yourself. P.S.: If 269 was to actually express a chance (percentually or otherwise, which it like this does not), it would be a pretty high chance. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 09:28, 9 January 2017 (UTC)


 * You're still not getting it. I'll put it a different way: what is the name of the developer of the OS in question? InternetMeme (talk) 07:02, 11 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Are you still sure you understood my statement correctly? Yes, it is the platform name with the developer sticked in front of it, but it is also the official name of the OS (hence "not just"). It's the opposite with PlayStation 4, which does not include "Sony" afront, but you needed to change to "Sony PlayStation 4", contrary to the official name. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 14:18, 11 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Oh, good. I think we're on the same page: Windows can be referred to as either just "Windows", or as "Microsoft Windows". So anyway, the gist of WP:ARTCON is that formatting styles should be applied consistently within a given article. So each item on the OS list should comprise either "company name + OS name", or just "OS name", but not a mixture of both.


 * I disagree with your assertion that just because the creating users opts to disregard WP:ARTCON, then we should continue to disregard WP:ARTCON. I think that would be tantamount to maintaining the misspelling of a word just because the creating user misspelled it.


 * InternetMeme (talk) 15:17, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
 * No, we're looking at WP:TM. The major operating systems are "Microsoft Windows" (TM), "OS X" (TM), and "Linux" (not trademarked as such). OS X is not trademarked "Apple OS X". We can't artificially change that. ARTCON doesn't allow us to mess with proper names like that. The only question is if we called it "Microsoft Windows" or just "Windows", as noted above, but standard practice for video games is to use "Microsoft Windows". --M ASEM (t) 15:29, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Correcting semi-incorrect statement about the game mechanics
"Though the game follows traditional first-person shooter gameplay mechanics, with the player attempting to take out enemy targets using guns and other weapons, time within the game only progresses when the player moves."

First of all, the game's time doesn't stop if you aren't moving. What happens instead is everything becomes extremely slow.

Second of all, it isn't mentioned in the introduction of this article that SuperHot's guns generate physical bullets, in contrast to guns in most other FPS games, which generates bullets as invisible lasers that only exist for the instant that the gun is fired.

Here's the corrected statement:

"Though the game follows traditional first-person shooter gameplay mechanics, with the player attempting to take out enemy targets using guns and other weapons, time within the game almost completely stops when the player's location isn't changing and the player isn't firing a gun or throwing a weapon, and the game's guns fire physical bullets that can be dodged, unlike most other first-person shooter games, where bullets hit the first thing in their path the instant the gun is fired."

2602:306:CE62:8430:24B6:C1B0:7C62:F72F (talk) 23:24, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * To your second point, this is the difference between hit scanning and projectile based weapons (Which isn't that uncommon a mechanic). The claim requires a source to include though. -- ferret (talk) 23:26, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Split MCD to own article
It is a standalone game and features its own mechanics, story and reviews. // Gargaj (talk) 12:27, 3 February 2024 (UTC)


 * If you think the available sources indicate notability and would serve for a decently sized article, you can just WP:be bold -- no real need for a discussion. IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 12:44, 3 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Ok, but then why is there a Template:Split? :) Anyway, done it. // Gargaj (talk) 13:36, 3 February 2024 (UTC)