Talk:Age of Empires III

GAR request

This article has been tagged with {{GAR request}}. Looking through it, it does need a bit of work to meet our standards. @Ck lostsword, Disavian, TomasBat, and Vanished user 82345ijgeke4tg:. AIRcorn (talk) 22:17, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Age of Empires III/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

An editor has requested a Good Article Review for this article. It has been tagged with having a too long plot since 2015. Following a discussion here I recently tagged the gameplay for not having enough sources. The other sections look quite good. I am hoping someone interested in this game will help get these issues sorted so it can keep its GA status. AIRcorn (talk) 03:32, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

• No takers so delisting. AIRcorn (talk) 10:05, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I propose to merge Age of Empires III: Definitive Edition into this article. Per the consesnsus here and here, remasters generally shouldn't have its own article unless the changes are very significant (which is not the case here). OceanHok (talk) 12:17, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose "Rebuilt assets" and "new multiplayer" seem like pretty major changes. Something on par with Dark Souls: Remastered is probably what I would call "not deserving of its own article" as the tweaks are largely extremely minor, with the game itself hardly being different than an outright port. That doesn't seem to be the case here._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 12:34, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Unless there is significant coverage of those changes in gameplay and development to actually require more space for that, a separate article seems wholly unwarranted. Just having such new features is not a measure for a stand-alone, it is how much they have been covered by reliable sources. --Masem (t) 13:25, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

• They are though? In the review mentioned in the reception section, it stated the reviewer "praised the new graphics". I don't doubt there is plenty of coverage on the changes made to the game. See also WP:NEXIST._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 15:48, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I disagree "new graphics" alone justify a standalone article. Unless it is something fundamentally different, otherwise the parent article can handle all the information sufficiently. This falls a bit more on WP:CONTENTFORK given the parent article is rather short. OceanHok (talk) 18:41, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Totally re-reviewed by major outlets with 46(!) reviews and has a heavy graphical revamp. By your logic, Demon's Souls remake shouldn't have an article either, since it kept the exact same gameplay and level design of the original, whilst redoing the graphics and music. Superficial aspects is absolutely a reason to have an article if critics think it makes a big difference (and looking at the reviews, they clearly do). Keeping the article seems harmless, and this feels like a mis=aimed crusade._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 20:32, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

So are The Last of Us Remastered (70!) and Dark Souls Remastered (53!). Keeping the article is harmless, but having it here has no point when it contains so little information (essentially making it an unnecessary content fork). It was also annoying to see that I have to click into at least three articles in order to get a full view of what Age of Empires III really is. Also note that all the Definitive Editions for Age of Empires are positioned as remasters, while stuff like Demon's Souls are positioned as a full remake. Per WP:NVG, this is what I called a "short or redundant" article. Unless someone is willing to expand this article significantly, otherwise I don't see the point keeping it here. OceanHok (talk) 03:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

The fact is the article could be expanded significantly and be a solid article. Per WP:NORUSH and WP:NEXIST that means there's no harm in it staying. WP:RUSHDELETE also applies to merging as well. This article was only created earlier this year. I can see people expanding it more in the future._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 05:11, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

We need the new features discussed in terms of a development section, which is something at least the Demon's Souls remaster has going for it. I don't know if that exists for this game but those should have been in this article first before splitting it out from the original game. Otherwise the content overlap so much with the original game outside the mention of the new features and reception to not necessitate a new article. --Masem (t) 15:33, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support WP:OVERLAP. The game is not a complete rebuilt like Mafia: Definitive Edition, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Remastered or Serious Sam HD: The First Encounter. The coverage is not that significant. Also WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST. Other article has not been challenged for the WP:GNG and WP:OVERLAP does not mean we should keep Age of Empires III: Definitive Edition as separate article. Matthew hk (talk) 06:18, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose the changes from original are signficant enough to warrant its own article (I mean this game was released 15 years after the original so this is not a Talk:The Last of Us Remastered situation either). The coverage garnered by this game also satifies WP:GNG and has 46 reviews on MC.  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 17:15, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Name is meaningless. Bioshock and BioShock Remastered are very very similar in graphic, the latter without significant coverage, bug also carry over. Just the remastered has Steam integration. As i said, you can't use because A article exist so that B article should exist logic. AOE III DE significant coverage is pale, or rather some part of them are actually coverage for the base gameplay of the original . Matthew hk (talk) 16:26, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

It is hard to see where you are getting at but fundamentally, the game has recieved SIGCOV and is significantly different enough to have a standalone article.  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 08:35, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• Neutral comment the decisive thing for me would be whether there is a substantial development section of its own, with any kind of coverage about how this remake to be. Otherwise you could very easily just add the re-release and reception to the main article, as they're both very short. Shooterwalker (talk) 05:28, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support The games are essentially similar, regardless of marketing-speak. The addition of multiplayer enhancements is noteworthy, but not deserving of a separate article. (I'm considering, too, how much work is involved maintaining parity between two articles vs. maintaining a Remastered section in the main article, not to mention how much less confusing a single article would be to our readers. — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 02:48, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose You'd have to rewrite substantial parts of the article. They've changed the names of the Ages, the way certain civilisations work was altered in fundamental ways, the games aren't compatible (i.e. if you have the original game, you cannot play a multiplayer game with someone who has the DE), none of the civilisations have non-cosmetic homecity levels any more (i.e. a fundamental change to how the game works), the multiplayer system has been completely overhauled and there are new game features. At best, you'd have to start a new section which goes "forget everything we've just told you, here's how the DE works" either at the end (as if it was a new article) or in every single section of the current one. Whirlsler (talk) 08:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose They are adding updates and downloadable content to the game, which shows that it's still changing and adding new features. Obi-WanKenobi-2005 (talk) 17:38, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
• Listed this at WP:CR.  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 08:38, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.