Talk:Video game writing

Merger proposal
I propose that Video game writer be merged into Video game writing. The profession of video game writer can be explained within the article about writing, as is the case in Video game design. Especially as both articles are relatively short (stubs), there is no need for splitting the content in two pages. Moreover, in the article Video game writer only the first and the last paragraph seems to be about the profession of a writer and the rest is concerned with writing. Section Video game writing actually discusses different types of writers. I believe merging of these two articles would allow to explain the topic in a more concise and ordered fashion. Biexx (talk) 00:35, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I could do you one better and propose that both articles be merged into Screenwriting. From what I can see, all the things that make video game writing any different from the average screenwriting style could be pretty easily summarized within a paragraph or so on that page. Cat&#39;s Tuxedo (talk) 23:05, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm OK with merging everything in screenwriting. Incognito668 (talk) 13:40, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Merging into Screenwriting seems to be a good idea in articles' current state. Although, video game writing might warrant its own article at some point, assuming editors can avoid overlap with screenwriting. Biexx (talk) 11:55, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
 * 100% agree. Merge - If there was lots about writing specifically for Video games, then that would be fine, but there isn't much in RS's that make it worth a standalone article  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:02, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Agree with merging video game writer and video game writing. Disagree with merging them into screenwriting. I believe there are enough differences between the two for separate articles to be warranted. For instance: combining story with game mechanics, writing many smaller pieces to present lore, writing within a branching path structure, writing around a "blank slate" player character, etc. The article certainly needs a lot of work to cover everything it should, but I believe that a. retaining it as a separate article does no harm, and b. the needed work is more likely to be encouraged if it remains separate. Lowercaserho (talk) 04:04, 10 July 2018 (UTC)