Talk:Dragon Quest XI

Should the NX port be addressed?

It was announced at the same time as the others, after all. Should it be mentioned in the article, despite the Nintendo NX not having an original page yet? Geesi (talk) 14:39, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

It was announced by mistake and redacted. You can see it in the article edit history. — Smuckola(talk) 17:28, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Square Enix's press release for the announcement clearly says "In addition, we are considering releasing it on the NX※ currently being developed by Nintendo Co., Ltd." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.190.156.120 (talk) 08:58, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

"Considering" is the keyword. Until they officially reveal it, we shouldn't list it as a platform. They only official state the PS4 and 3DS versions in the table, too. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 09:39, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

I think it's still important info to include in one of the sections. Also the press release also reveals who's helping develop it. Brayden96 (talk) 03:23, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

It's still not confirmed, but it's enough to state they are considered it, just like the press release says. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 03:24, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I know. I'm not saying it should be under platforms. Simply under development is fine.Brayden96 (talk) 03:29, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Right. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 05:03, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Is it confirmed for which platform this is going to be released internationally? It could be just PS4 or 3DS not both. --MK (talk) 06:19, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

In the initial announcement, no platforms were announced, but at some point, some sources pointed out that Sony hosted a trailer for the game, making all but confirmed the PS4 version is coming at least. I haven't seen the exact link though, just a few websites alluding to it... Sergecross73 msg me 13:14, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Not open world

We’ve got a source straight from the game’s creators that this game is not open world. This content is literally stated with this source in the article. So why is thus being contested. I’ve had to remove the term/category multiple times now. Sergecross73 msg me 19:27, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

• Like most JPRGs with an overworld, the game has sections of the map blocked off until certain points in plot have been completed. This has been a common trope in JRPGs since their inception in the 1980s, so I also don't see why people are confusing it for "open world". ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:55, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Planning screenshots of 3DS and PS4 versions

I plan to upload a screenshot of Japan-only 3DS version showing 3D and 2D Modes in both screens and a screenshot of PS4 version showing a typical combat. However, I'm torn. I could not find a suitable room for the 3DS version and wonder whether a still frame of the combat helps much. George Ho (talk) 20:36, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Dragon Quest XI S

As you can see on the official website (http://www.dq11.jp), Dragon Quest XI S is considered a new video game by Square Enix, not a port of the PS4/Switch version. It has a separate website, doesn't share the old one.

It even has a new separate copyright text in the footer for the game. It's clear that it's treated as a new version, not just a port. Also considering they said more info will be revealed on Jan 1, it's highly likely that there will be even more new features to this version.

Also, as my final and definitive point. In the reveal panel the devs said it isn't a port of the PS4 version, but instead "built from the ground up" for Switch. (https://twitter.com/Stealth40k/status/1076353807607627776, the panel is also archived on YouTube) RedBlocks (talk) 06:49, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, it’s being rebuilt so that it’ll actually run on Switch, but it’s still just basically the same game with some smaller games changed. It’s not a new game, it’s more like the difference between Final Fantasy X for PS2 and Final Fantasy X Remastered for PS3/Vita - completely rebuilt to run on a new platform, but still the same core game. Sergecross73 msg me 15:09, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Right, but I don't think this warrants having the extra info in the lead. Any special info like this can belong in the dev/release section, which is my issue with it. @Sergecross73:, I'll let you decide which version of the lead we should use here. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:29, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

I think falling somewhere in the middle is the best choice: I don’t think “new” is the right term, but noting the alternate name and vaguely alluding to added features makes sense. I think eventually something like “enhanced port” will be the right term, but I don’t know if there’s the sourcing to support that yet. Sergecross73 msg me 18:49, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

I made the changes. And yeah, you can't really call it "new" or "enhanced" as it visually looks like a downgraded PS4/Windows version, albeit with some additional features such as Japanese voice acting and some other non-confirmed stuff. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 18:26, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, it’s a weird situation for sure, as expanded, later releases generally don’t get a downgrade in graphics but also added content. We’ll see what sources are calling it when we get closer to release I suppose... Sergecross73 msg me 19:39, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Regarding this game, should it be noted that Nintendo will serve as publisher for the Switch version internationally? 204.62.118.153 (talk)16:16, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

If it’s officially confirmed, then yes, it should be mentioned somewhere. Sergecross73 msg me 16:29, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Japanese voice for the Switch version?

[resolved] Could someone clarify the following point?: The article says the Switch version will include Japanese voice. But the text is ambiguous if it is available in all regions, or at least in the North American one, in addition to the Japanese version. The sources don't say anything.

Actually, Japanese voice is not the first for the entire series; the Japanese 3DS version of the DQ8 has one. Thus to be precise, it might be first to ship with Japanese voice for all regions, if it's what the text in fact means. --D9w.hatena (talk) 06:50, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

It's in all regions, per the gameplay they showed at E3. And it seems you are correct about DQ8, so I'll change the wording. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 16:46, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! --D9w.hatena (talk) 02:06, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Mention to fans' mod and revert

The current article refers to fans' mod in the "Reception" section, but mention to be trivial and I deleted it. It was reverted with the edit summary:

how is it silly if it got media coverage and was a direct result of a critical complaint? not to mention Square Enix basically responded to it too with the official inclusion of it in the Switch version

But I disagree.

• Fans do every kind of reaction, not to mention hacking. - If it were to be written here, each and every minute thing like "speed up your PC by such-and-such" could be covered in Wikipedia. Obviously it is wrong. WP:NOTFANSITE, WP:NOTBLOG and WP:NOTEVERYTHING.
• Media coverage? The deleted part cites this article, which is nothing more than an instruction about how to install the mod. (The site itself, Siliconera, is often an acceptable news source in Wikipedia.)
• It's in the "reception" section, so off-topic. It's not a critique at all.
• Square Enix responded to the fans' mod? It's a personal assumption without any evidence.

Some critics found the sound quality of the early versions poor. That's all. --D9w.hatena (talk) 08:37, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

 Comment: I would totally agree if it was this long, rambling, unsourced section/paragraph dedicated to it. But we’re talking about a single sentence that can be reliably sourced. (If Siliconera isn’t good enough for you, there is US Gamer, which is about as reliable as they come, among others.) I have no issue with a brief mention of this. Sergecross73 msg me 11:31, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

 Comment:

• Point 1: I agree about fan outrage, but if it has articles written about it, then it was clearly somewhat notable. And like Serge said, it's just a single sentence.
• Point 2: Could be replaced with another source, such as the USGamer one Serge brought up.
• Point 3: How is criticism not a part of its overall reception? Where else would this even go?
• Point 4: That is my own personal opinion yes, but this specific claim is nowhere in the article. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 18:56, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I changed indentations, hoping to improve readability. Sorry if it annoys.
Ok, it doesn't seem that you two's views differ much from mine.

• If a long mention to fans' mod is wrong, as Sergecross73 indicated, it's wrong. Length has nothing to do. Simply delete it. (You two sound like "o I beg your mercy, please overlook a single sentence slippng in." Be self-confident. ;-)
• If fans' acts are not worth mentioning (point 1), that's all. You two are confused; the problem is an external source about fans reaction, not about the review of the game itself. As I already said, we already cite reliable commentaries which criticize the sound condition.

The rest is not relevant, but to be clear:

• Point 2: Adding a similar source won't improve the situation at all. (We're not disputing e.g. the source's independence, sock-puppetry, or COI. More is not justice.)
• Point 4: Personal opinion - Please, withdraw and forget it. You have a right to write it in your own site, but not in Wikipedia. (In my personal HO "SquareEnix responded" is a childish day-dream. It doesn't seem you know much about business.)

Thanks for your comments and your contributions. Best regards. --D9w.hatena (talk) 22:54, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't wish to offend, but it appears that you are the one who is confused or doesn't quite understand policy/guidelines on this sort of thing.

• You're right that "fan reaction" is generally not acceptable, but you're wrong in your understanding of when it is acceptable. It is acceptable when it is being reported upon by a reliable third party source. Coverage in a high level source like USGamer absolutely makes it fair play for inclusion.
• Length/amount of content absolutely does matter. See WP:UNDUE. Our points were merely that it doesn't violate UNDUE when its such a short mention. Granted, you didn't cite it, and you appear to not even know of the concept, so perhaps it was addressing an argument that wasn't being made, but it's a common discussion in these sorts of disputes, so it makes sense that me or Dissident's minds would go there.
• It's not out of line to mention in the reception section. It was something done in response to perceived judgement on the game's quality. That's fair game for reception (and, in small doses.)
• Whether or not Square responded to fans isn't part of the the content added, so its irrelevant to these discussions.

If you need an example of precedent in all this, the GA Mass Effect 3 is a commonly used case-study in the video game guidelines/community. While fan reaction is generally not covered, it is here because 1) lots of reliable sources covered the negative fan reaction and 2) while not explicitly game reviews, it goes into things that were done in as a result of the bad reception (legal case, rewritten game ending, etc.) There's precedent for what Dissident and I are saying. Sergecross73 msg me 23:18, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Full Article Name

Shouldn't the full name of this article be "Dragon Quest XI: Echoes of an Elusive Age"? While it's true that past games in the franchise have not had subtitles, just look to games such as Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag and Halo 5: Guardians, which use the full title. Buh6173 (talk) 21:18, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Buh6173, WP:SUBTITLES and WP:CONCISE prefer the use of the shortest possible name, assuming it causes no confusion or other issues. Both of your listed examples aren't really that long with the included subtitle, which is why they generally get to stay. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 21:42, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Pretty much what I was gonna say. Sergecross73 msg me 22:30, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

GA Nomination

Any objections? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:21, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Judgesurreal777: No, but I'm not sure if this would pass in its current state. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 00:58, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Well I assume they will tell me what’s wrong and then I’ll fix it... I mean I had to take the whole Rinoa Heartilly article apart to pass GA, which is fine. I usually do whatever it takes! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:32, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Wow, there was a lot of fixes identified! It might take me a bit to get to them all. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 12:19, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

FYI, this isn’t really one where there was a primary creator or writer like myself/ProtoDrake/Abryn/Alexandra etc. Dissident and I watch over it for light maintenance and vandalism upkeep, but there’s no one really “steering the ship” on this one. Or at least that’s what it’s felt like anecdotally while watching over it this past year or two. So that’s probably why you’re not getting much feedback. Sergecross73 msg me 12:39, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Sergecross73, yeah, I haven't really expanded upon it since its PC release in 2018 (when I played through it). ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 19:39, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

That's good to know, thank you! Looking at the GA review, seems like this article needs an “Improver” :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 12:58, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Here are the GA Notes:

The lead is insufficient. There is no mention of gameplay and plot, which are two important sections in this article.

”Elements added later included an expanded plot and an option to listen to an orchestral version of the score.” - So these are part of the game's DLC or exclusive to the Switch version? What do you mean by expanded plot though? It was never mentioned in detail in the release section afterwards.

”One of the first games announced for the Nintendo Switch video game console, the game was originally conceived as an open world game” - a bit clumsy. You have just mentioned Switch in the paragraph just directly above.

The gameplay section is inadequate. It barely explains to me how this game plays. "Common elements of the Dragon Quest series" is only a "see also" and readers should not need to click on that to understand how this game plays.

“including the ability to explore high areas” - what even is this?

Also, try to reduce comparisons with other Dragon Quest titles. For readers who have never played any DQ games (like me), it doesn't help me understand anything.

The plot section is a little bit too long. Try to trim it to 700 words or below. I also think that a subsection discussing the setting of the game would help me understand the plot a bit easier, because there is a lot of in-universe stuff in the plot section that can be better explained.

The development and release section contains very little information about the actual development, which is disappointing. Just a quick Google I find these already that contains at least something about the game's design. I am sure there should be a lot more, both in English and Japanese sources, for a big-budget title in a long-running series.

The reception section is too short. It doesn't explain what critics actually praise, while spending a lot of time discussing the criticisms, which is a bit WP:UNDUE, meaning that this section isn't an accurate representation of the game's actual reception

“some critics regarded the overly conservative nature” - I don't think you really have discussed what exactly is this "overly conservative nature" as well. The wording is overly vague. Does that mean turn-based combat?

The protagonist being included as a figher in Smash isn't really a "reception". Move it somewhere else.

Edit warring

An IP address that has no edits other than trying to remove a screenshot, has been reverted by multiple people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/47.144.193.12 On one revert

The image shows Hendrik, who is mentioned in the Plot section as joining the party, and no one who hadn't played the game already would recognize him, his name hard to read in that screenshot. This is nothing that spoils the game, no one surprised when he joins you. Dream Focus 01:50, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

The person has now been blocked for three days. They did their first removal last month, so might return. Dream Focus 01:52, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Even beyond all that, spoilers are allowed anyways, per WP:SPOILER. Sergecross73 msg me 01:53, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Maybe replace it with a screenshot that doesn't include that specific character? There are seven other characters to choose from, and deliberately using an image with that one character makes it seem like that picture was used specifically to provoke a reaction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.98.119.214 (talk) 02:13, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

No. Please read WP:SPOILER. Sergecross73 msg me 02:41, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

This IP address has three edits total, one here, one from 4 August 2020, and one from 26 December 2018. So I assume its the same IP that just got blocked for edit warring and personal insults. Dream Focus 02:44, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Inconsistency

"USgamer considered the game to be the natural followup to Dragon Quest VIII, the last main-series console game to be released outside of Japan"

"In North America, the game had the best launch month in series history, doubling the dollar sales of the previous best, Dragon Quest IX"

??? 77.172.145.114 (talk) 12:00, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

I think USGamer is emphasizing the home video game console aspect of it, and saying that 11 is more of a natural progression from 8 because 9 was made for a (less powerful) handheld, and 10 was an online game. The other source refers to the reality that 9 was the most recently released and localized title. Not really an inconsistency, just different sources talking about different things. Sergecross73 msg me 13:20, 30 May 2022 (UTC)