Talk:Thatgamecompany/Archives/2014

Suggested change
Even though the reception of Journey has been noted in the history section,

"Upon release, the game achieved both critical and commercial success. It became the fastest-selling game to date on PlayStation Store in both North America and Europe."

would it be appropriate to change the first line of the description of Journey in the Games section from

"Journey is thatgamecompany's latest game."

to

"Journey is thatgamecompany's latest, and most well-received game." ?

Neuroxic (talk) 02:43, 27 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Journey being a faster-selling game on the PSStore than the two previous games, and doing well in reviews, does not in turn mean that it was the "most well-received game". Did it sell the most? Maybe, but "fastest-selling" doesn't tell us that. Did it get better reviews? Yes, except that Flower (PS4) is actually higher, and critical reviews may not accurately reflect popular opinion. In the end, we can only say that it is the "most well-received game" if we have a source directly saying that; at the moment we do not. -- Pres N  03:13, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Developed games table
I suggest making a concise table, or a list, of the games the studio developed. While they are all mentioned in the article, I feel that an average wiki reader would appreciate an eye-catching list of some sort under Games, especially since this is a FA. Something like this maybe:

I haven't checked if there already was one at some point (and has since been removed) or if this was already discussed and deemed unnecessary, so pardon my rashness (and laziness). ProKro (talk) 19:46, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * You know, I was going to disagree- there's only three games, after all, and they're listed out one short paragraph per game. But the article doesn't really talk about all the systems each game has since been released for, does it, and that technical wordiness would quite overwhelm the prose. "Flower was released for system x on date y, and ported to system z on date a by company d, and ported to system b on date c by company e in partnership with company f." Bleh. Three games might not need a table, but three games times four systems seems fine. Added what you made to the article; it seems good for the purpose. -- Pres N  20:21, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I was thinking the same at first, but it just seemed bare somehow - seems to fit, though. I am sure there are more masterpieces on the way and the table is ought to get bigger. Cheers. ProKro (talk) 23:27, 4 December 2014 (UTC)