Talk:Wolfenstein: The New Order

Really the 9th game?
First of all, the first two games listed on the series wikipedia page were not FPS games at all, nor did id software have anything to do with them whatsoever. The core series began with Wolfenstein 3D. It was made as "Wolfenstein" because ID discovered that there was no copyright for those other 2 games, thus giving them the freedom to use the Wolfenstein name et al.

Secondly, you're also including the iOS/mobile "RPG" game? Seriously? No mobile spinoff of a core game series has ever been considered cannon.

No, Wolfenstein: The New Order will be the 6th game, not the 9th. 71.168.201.136 (talk) 17:04, 13 June 2013 (UTC)Kragg

Release date the 19th for PC
I can't verify the console system releases, but I can say the current release is wrong for the PC version. PC release was May 19, 2014. I'm not very good with wiki syntax, so I'm going to leave this here for now & either try to figure it out later when I have more time or hope somebody does the edit for me & makes sure it looks correct.

WonderGamer (talk) 17:36, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Wolfenstein: The New Order was officially released on 20 May 2014 for all platforms. -- Rhain1999  (talk to me) 09:18, 24 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry to burst your bubble, but no it wasn't. It was released on the 19th on Steam.  Apparently you can't use references on "Talk" pages, so I'll move that down here.  See here for verification:  http://store.steampowered.com/app/201810


 * WonderGamer (talk) 14:35, 27 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Steam page says 20th May. Also IGN, Game Informer and Polygon lists the PC date as 20th:
 * http://www.ign.com/games/wolfenstein-the-new-order/pc-167457
 * http://www.gameinformer.com/games/wolfenstein_the_new_order/b/pc/default.aspx
 * http://www.polygon.com/game/wolfenstein-the-new-order/12750 --Mika1h (talk) 22:50, 27 May 2014 (UTC)


 * What region are you in? I got the 19th in the US.  Unsure if time zone is playing a factor in this...
 * http://store.steampowered.com/app/201810?cc=us
 * http://www.wondergamer.net/images/Wolfenstein%20-%20the%20New%20Order%20release%20date.jpg


 * EDIT: Decided to start a topic on this on the Steam forums: http://steamcommunity.com/app/201810/discussions/0/540743032455059008/


 * WonderGamer (talk) 03:30, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, let me settle this for you:
 * The game was released on 20 May 2014. Bethesda says so, MachineGames says so, and frankly, what they say is all that matters to me in this discussion.
 * In an Australian time zone, the Steam page confirms the game was released on 20 May 2014. According to your Steam discussion, the game unlocked on 19 May at 11p.m. in the United Kingdom? That's because it unlocked elsewhere in the world (it was already 20 May in half the world by that time) at the same time.
 * Finally, games break street date all the time, and generally it's not a very notable thing to mention in an article. Even if the game did release earlier than intended on Steam, I don't want it to be mentioned in the article. Unless the "early release" caused controversy, or the developers seemed upset by it, then it's not notable to put in a Wikipedia article.
 * Despite this, thank you for your valiant efforts to keep Wikipedia a good and reliable website. Though these current suggestions aren't really notable, or correct in some cases, your efforts are definitely appreciated. -- Rhain1999  (talk to me) 21:46, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Considering you are now throwing edits on my profile page (or rather, removing relevant information), I'm going to throw one more detail out here that might be the deciding factor on this dispute. A legal copy of the PC version of this game has a requirement of Steam activation to even run it (regardless of whether you purchased retail or not; further details can be found here or any other off-site purchase you can find).  Would it not make sense to go by the Steam release date for the PC version of the game if their DRM is a legal requirement to even run it?


 * Until the information is corrected, that dispute information will stay on my profile. If you attempt to remove it again, I will simple revert your edit once again. You may have control over what goes on this article, but not what goes on my profile page.  If you can look at the situation from another person's perspective, this is the same thing you are doing in regards to this article; I am posting the information there because you won't allow it here.
 * WonderGamer (talk) 17:46, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the edit to your user page. That's none of my business, so I shouldn't have touched it. My apologies.
 * However, I'm still standing by the fact that the PC release date was 20 May 2014. This is made fact by both the Steam store page (screenshot) and the MobyGames link that you posted (screenshot). I realise that you're passionate about this, but I urge you to focus this passion somewhere else. You appear to be a fantastic editor, and you're great at finding references. But an accidental early release of a game (which is really only a time zone problem) is not notable, and I sincerely recommend that you focus your talents somewhere else. Thanks. -- Rhain1999  (talk to me) 21:00, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

William "B.J." Blazkowicz now updated accordingly
--Niemti (talk) 09:29, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Niemti. You've done a really good job on that article. It looks great. -- Rhain1999  (talk to me) 10:18, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I would say otherwise... He has refused to add the correct release date for the Steam version & my changes were reverted when I attempted to correct it.  There is a running discussion on this on the Steam forums where others have confirmed the release was the 19th for the Steam version that he has completely ignored. - WonderGamer (talk) 13:26, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Just because Niemti doesn't agree with you, doesn't mean that he did a bad job on the Blazkowicz article. I've addressed your issues about the Steam release date above. -- Rhain1999  (talk to me) 21:46, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Not going to argue with the fact that he did a good job on the article, but the release date is inaccurate & the fact that it's being argued by higher-ups is showing that accuracy apparently isn't a high priority here... I always thought Wikipedia had a proud sense of being an accurate database; maybe I was wrong...  Maybe the Steam release date isn't high priority enough to add it, but negating that information under the principle of being a minor detail shows lack of initiative & I have somewhat lost my faith in the accuracy of Wikipedia at this point...


 * And to answer your question, no; I'm a US citizen, so the release date I am arguing is a (Steam) US release date (apparently accurate in a number of other regions also). I will admit the actual date may differ depending on where you are in the US, but based on the Steam timezone (Washington according to the BBB), it's the 19th; I myself am in Mountain time, a 1 hour difference. - WonderGamer (talk) 01:31, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Firstly, I don't know what you mean by "higher-ups". Secondly, Wikipedia absolutely strives off of being an accurate database, you are not wrong. The thing is, this talk page is the only page on the Internet that I've seen showing an interest in the Steam release date for the game. The game is officially listed as launching on May 20, 2014, so that's what the article will list. Finally, I believe the game launched on Steam at midnight in Sweden (where MachineGames are based), which explains this whole dilemma that we're discussing. -- Rhain1999  (talk to me) 06:34, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

System requirements
I attempted to add the system requirements to the article only to have them almost immediately removed. How are the system requirements not relevant to the article?? MisterZed (talk) 14:38, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * As I stated in my edit summary, the documentation for the System requirements template state that the template is to be used "for articles where system requirements are deemed to have importance." As far as I'm aware, the system requirements for Wolfenstein: The New Order aren't deemed to have any importance; as you said in your edit summary, minimum system requirements have not been published, further proving my point. If you still believe that the system requirements should be included in the article (which is a perfectly reasonable belief), then please feel free to reply, or get a third opinion. -- Rhain1999  (talk to me) 14:55, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * So why have you removed my edits to several other games now as well? I cannot think of an instance where the system requirements are NOT important to the article. People who want to know the system requirements of a given game are more often than not going to come to the Wikipedia article first. They should be able to find that information here. Furthermore, your edits don't show any logic whatsoever. You removed the system requirements I added for Bioshock Infinite, Battlefield 4, and Crysis 3, yet the articles for each of their predecessors (Bioshock 2, Battlefield 3, and Crysis 2) all have the system requirements in the article. Why haven't you removed them from those articles?MisterZed (talk) 15:02, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what you're talking about. I didn't remove the System requirements template from BioShock Infinite, Battlefield 4 and Crysis 3; I think you're mistaking me for someone else. Thus, my edits do display logic. Additionally, if someone wishes to discover the system requirements of a game, then a quick Google search can easily help them. -- Rhain1999  (talk to me) 15:14, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * System requirements do have relevance when you consider PC versions. To say it has no relevance would mean you're likely a console gamer.  There's your third opinion, although it's already been proven that my opinion means nothing here, so I don't expect you to change your mind on this...


 * @MisterZed
 * I don't expect you're going to get anywhere on this situation, Rhain1999 is adamant about keeping his article as his own & isn't allowing edits.


 * @Rhain1999
 * If you really are going to take protection of your article so personal, why don't you request it be locked from edits so nobody can edit it. It's obvious any edits made to it is going to be reversed, so this article is a lost cause & I can't really see any purpose in ANYBODY trying to keep it updated; I can only imagine this being the case with any other articles you've written...


 * - WonderGamer (talk) 11:01, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I am both a PC gamer and a console gamer. The problem that I have with adding the System requirements to the page is that the PC version doesn't particularly show any significance over the other versions. However, if you want to add the System requirements to the page, then you are welcome to do so (as long as the table is collapsed, I'd say).
 * you're clearly upset that I'm not accepting of your edit. This is not "my" article; the only articles that are mine are those inside my userspace. I do not wish to lock this article from edits, because I am happy for other users to edit it. Your opinion is welcome here, but that doesn't always mean it will be accepted. If you look at the Revision history, you can see that I am happy to accept other edits, so long as they remain in the guidelines and are notable. That's where your request failed: the game was released on 20 May 2014. Any statement trying to reveal otherwise isn't particularly notable unless it hit headlines (which it didn't). This article is absolutely not a "lost cause" as it is still editable by anyone. And as a matter of fact, if you look at other articles that I've written, or significantly contributed to, (Red Dead Redemption, Grand Theft Auto V, Watch Dogs, The Music of Grand Theft Auto V, Trevor Philips, Max Payne 3, Grand Theft Auto IV), then you can see that I am also very accepting about edits on those. Unless it's vandalism, or its not notable.
 * So, next time you go about requesting an edit, prepare to be shut down, and try to act like a civilised human if you are. Thank you. -- Rhain1999  (talk to me) 20:16, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * "So, next time you go about requesting an edit, prepare to be shut down " - Rhain1999  (talk to me) 20:16, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * That sounded like a threat to me. You just made it sound like any edits I make in the future are going to be reversed regardless of accuracy or not.  Is there any reason in even having an account on Wikipedia anymore?  I would say no if my efforts are just going to be in vain...  Well maybe that's for the best; my Wiki syntax sucks anyways, I struggle just trying to make edits on here.  I struggle with it regardless of the difficulty I have with it because I care to keep information accurate, but seems it may not be worth the effort put into it anymore. - WonderGamer (talk) 01:45, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No, it's not a theat. You keep interpreting my comments incorrectly. What I meant is that you should always be prepared to be shut down, and continue to act like a civilised human if you are; don't thrash out at other users for rejecting your request or disagreeing with your opinion. There is definitely reason in having a Wikipedia account now, and most your edits will be accepted (given that they are reliable and notable). If you're having trouble with your Wiki syntax, then that's no reason to quit completely. I appreciate your efforts, but they are just not notable to add to the article. I recommend that you continue to contribute to Wikipedia, even if you just add suggestions to talk pages; everything is helpful. I really hope you can see why I disagree with your request. Thank you. -- Rhain1999  (talk to me) 02:42, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Perks
Someone should add some information on the perks system. I would but this game isn't "fresh" enough in my mind for what I write to be 100% accurate. I did add information on Perks at Wolfenstein: The Old Blood; maybe you could copy that and change what you need to? I might attempt. —DangerousJXD (talk) 03:10, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Carrie Coon
In The A.V. Club interview, Carrie Coon acknowledges that she worked with Raven Software one three projects: Return to Castle Wolfenstein, Wolverine, and a third game that she doesn't remember. This last one is probably Singularity (another Raven game she is credited in). The editor corrects that "Return to Castle Wolfenstein" should actually be its sequel, which is Wolfenstein 2009 (both were developed by Raven). No other video game is mentioned and Coon is not credited in The New Order (which was also not developed by Raven, rather by MachineGames in Sweden). I don't think that she was involved with The New Order and consequently should not be mention here. Regards, Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 12:43, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * k CapnZapp (talk) 14:37, 26 November 2019 (UTC)