Template talk:WWE video games

This template
I don't like this template. It's way too big on pages. It was far better to have one for the SmackDown games since it is a long running, still active game series. A Category:WWE games would be better. --Jtalledo (talk) 15:28, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Well thats your opinion, and your opinion is wrong. This page is about WWE games not just the Smackdown Series. Don.-.J 13:24, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * He's simply proposing that this template change, and I think it may be a good idea. This template is huge, mostly due to an overly broad scope. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 16:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the template could do with occupying less space, and I think the easiest way would be to have the template hidden as default. --Madbassist 23:57, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * This template is just formatted badly. Not just badly but oddly. Two series, X-Box games, then other consoles, then misc? It does take up too much space. I'm sure someone could figure out a better way to organize it. It should also contain games from franchises purchased by WWE, like WCW and ECW games.JohnnyMrNinja 08:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I condensed things a little bit but it's still huge. Also, some of the games, like War Zone and Attitude, were actually out for multiple consoles.  What do we do for that? Drwarpmind 17:19, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I took out all the old formatting, and listed the games by name or franchise. It takes up a lot less space, plus I think it looks a lot better. JohnnyMrNinja 02:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I just reformatted the template to make it smaller and more compact. Enjoy! MITB LS 19:41, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Bratz games
I reorganized this template, and shortly after someone added Bratz games. At first I thought it was someone upset that I added WCW and ECW games to the template, but I think it was just a fan of Bratz games. I have made a separate Bratz template, so please do not add Bratz games to this template again. Or any other games based on doll franchises. Unless the dolls are wrestling. JohnnyMrNinja 07:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

There's one person, (or maybe a team) who is/are sock puppets and keep adding random Bratz stuff to WWE games. Socby19 16:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)Socby19

Removed old WCW and ECW games
I removed the link to the old WCW and ECW games. These games were released before WWE owned the rights to ECW and WCW. WWE had nothing to do with their release. --Jtalledo (talk) 02:21, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

WWE Fantasy
I removed WWE Fantasy as a video game. Fantasy sports aren't video games. The article on fantasy sports doesn't mention them being video games and fantasy sports do not fall under the video game article's definition of video game: A video game is a game that involves interaction with a user interface to generate visual feedback on a video device. Simply put, there is no "video" being interacted with in WWE Fantasy or fantasy sports games in general. --Jtalledo (talk) 05:18, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Proposed changes
This box needs to be organized better. Smaller or not, it's worse than it was during the previous discussions. A Navbox should function as a way to view *related* articles within its topic. The grouping of games that have 'WrestleMania' in the title is useless because almost any two games in there have nothing BUT that in common. Worse than that, over half the links in the box are lumped into an 'Other' category with no rhyme or reason.

But, obviously, the previous grouping of games-by-console was off, because lots of games were made for multiple consoles.

Short of some kind of column-and-row table, I think it would be nearly impossible to categorize these to an exact science. But there should be some better way to group various releases together into a group. For instance, the games LJN/Acclaim produced from Steel Cage Challenge through Rage in the Cage all use variations on the same engine, so even though they were produced for a huge number of systems (NES, SNES, Genesis, Sega CD, Game Boy and Game Gear), they can all be lumped together.

The modern games (since 2001 or so) can all be put into four series: RAW, Smackdown, Smackdown vs. RAW, and Day of Judgement. The XBox 'Mania games can be put with RAW.

I think games that were produced for arcades should be in a seperate category. (I would include In Your House, which was a console-only sequel to WM: The Arcade Game.) By the same token, games that were made only for Game Boy systems-only can be put together, even though that technically leaves out ports, like King of the Ring, that were made for multiple systems.

For the rest of the console games, they're pretty much covered so far except for the N64/PS1, the first of the 3D games. They can logically go together, because (with the exception of the first three or four Smackdown! games) they were the only ones produced during the Attitude-era proper.

That just leaves two stragglers, With Authority! and Crush Hour, which are so unique that they definitely belong in an 'Other' category.



So this is basically broken down by format (Arcade, Portable, Console) with Console broken down into a generational grouping.

I left the (2D) and (3D) in there, just for descriptive purposes, but they're not necessary. Technically, the Smackdown series could be instead listed under the Attitude-era since it has been supplanted by the SvsR series, so is no longer current. Also, the games that were ported to Game Boy/Game Gear/PSP could be duplicated in the Portable section to make it more accurate and complete. Same with Arcade games that had Console ports.

This layout would leave it open for future expansion: if the mobile phone games ever got their own articles, they can be put under the Portables heading, and likewise older games like European Rampage could be put under a Computer heading. (Someone has also eliminated the view/discuss/edit and hide/show links, so they definitely need to be put back in.)

If nobody raises any objections, I'll change this in a week or so. And if this still seems too big, there are numerous ways it could be changed. TravelingCat 04:01, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah it does seem too big. Why don't you bring your porposal up to WP:PW's talk page? -- bullet proof  3:16 07:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Added Amiga games
I added the two WWF games made for Amiga. If anyone wants to cut through all the crap to add screens or box covers, go ahead. - Max85 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Max85 (talk • contribs) 01:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

WWE Smackdown vs. RAW collection
the original Smackdown vs. RAW, Smackdown vs. RAW 2006 & Smackdown vs. RAW 2007 were a part of the WWE Smackdown vs. RAW collection. But Smackdown vs. RAW 2008 has left out of collection. so how did it happen?

SmackDown vs. Raw
SvR, SvR 06, 07, 08, 09, and online are NOT part of the SmackDown series. They are their OWN series. So someone fix it. I don't feel like it. Matrix8110 (talk) 20:42, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay I got tired of waiting. Here's my version of the template. Before I replace this one with that one, I just want to show you all just in case you don't like it or if it doesn't work:

And I will post this on my userpage. Matrix8110 (talk) 20:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC) I agree about it being its own series! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.82.164.170 (talk) 03:41, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

wwe 12
wwe 12 is bare live lol i mean daniel bryan was lucky u have to addmit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaneus33 (talk • contribs) 18:36, 23 February 2012 (UTC)  then came wwe13
 * This is not a review site.Thecleanerand (talk) 12:38, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

King of Fighters and WWE are NOT crossing over
Removed the King of Fighters link to the WWE template. Take-Two and SNK are NOT making agreements for KoF vs. WWE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FALLOFALL (talk • contribs) 01:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Publishers and developers
I removed the publishers and developers. The template is supposed to list WWE video games, not WWE video game publishers and developers. The games are closely related via the WWE license, but there are many different developers/publishers for which most of their output consists of non-WWE games. --Jtalledo (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Timeline?
Just wondering if this wouldn't be better expressed as a timeline, to better show which games are direct sequels and contemporaries to each other. In Your House being a direct sequel to the home port of WrestleMania The Arcade Game, for example, is not in the least apparent from this navbox, and that is pretty important info to understand the relationship between the games. Also, the use of "main series" for the 2k games is totally WP:RECENTISM and ignores that the THQ N64 games were easily just as much the "main series" as the PS1 SmackDown games. oknazevad (talk) 13:42, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Battlegrounds
Battlegrounds is a spin-off and not part of the main series. That's like saying WWE All Stars or WWE Day of Reckoning would also be included.Thecleanerand (talk) 12:37, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Reorganization proposal
This entire template reeks of awesomeness WP:RECENTISM and absolutely atrocious organization. It needs a total overhaul into a chronological listing, because the groupings are based on a completely false premise, that the reuse of long-running event names as game titles make them somehow more related to each other instead of being direct sequels to other games. Look at this template and tell me that there is anyway to tell that the highly regarded No Mercy is a direct sequel to Wrestlemania 2000. It makes no sense to do anything other than chronological order. oknazevad (talk) 23:44, 24 October 2023 (UTC)