Jump to content

Talk:Princess Maker 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dates in the Article

[edit]

All dates in the game are given as YEAR K.D., not YEAR A.D. I've updated the guide to fix this.

Too Detailed for an Article?

[edit]

Too much information? This article looks like a strategy guide

Very good point. There is too much unsourced and unnotable information and it does not use a neutral tone. I think it needs a complete rewrite. Shui9 08:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Petite Princess Yucie & Old Dragon

[edit]

I thought that Cube character there as well as that of the Princess are based on Princess Maker 3, because the appearance is very similar. Then, how do you know that the Old Dragon is Father's old friend? Is it states somewhere?--SayaMan 20:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Fixing" this article

[edit]

I've added a couple of tags. I also completely axed the "gameplay" section, it was nothing but Game guide material. The article needs sources, I can probably dig a few up, I have seen a few articles about this game. There's also a ton of original research. What struck me as huge OR was the "controversy" section. While there was some controversy over the planned US release of the game, the articles I read about it were far more concerned with the premise of the game (a man controlling a young girl's every action) than any specific thing...I don't remember any actual complaints about the endings or some of the choices the girl or player could make. I'll do some work when I have some free time. --UsaSatsui (talk) 10:34, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Princess Maker 2. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:49, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

[edit]

Please see: WP:COPYVIOEL. Neither sega retro or retrocdn have any permission to host scanned magazines and linking to them are copyright violations. Wikipedia policy is very clear on forbidding links to such organizations and only allows it if they have publisher permission to host that material. Furthermore, the Associated Press overview, and Sega Saturn Magazine, Ultra Gameplayers reviews have already been added. The other sources (such as insert credit) are self-published and do not pass as notable or reliable sources. we don't need to cite every single enthusiast website's view on the game. WP:Weight should be placed on mainstream print publications which gave extensive coverage to the game. It's not every day that the Associated Press decides to dedicate an entire page to a video game and have it published all over American newspapers. Harizotoh9 (talk) 17:25, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reception section skewed toward Western sources

[edit]

The current Reception section doesn't really cut it because it's heavily skewed toward Western reviews. Princess Maker 2 was primarily a Japanese title with its initial impact and sales rooted in Japan, yet contemporary Japanese coverage is barely represented beyond a few Famitsu scores. There's a lot of period material that could help rebalance this, such as reviews and commentary in magazines like LOGIN!, ASCII, PC Engine Fan, Comptiq. Without incorporating more of that domestic context, the section overemphasizes later Western cultural critique and gives a distorted picture of the game's reception.

This entire article could be a case in point of how using generalist reliable sources outside their domain is not preferable to using local industry sources. Many cited Western sources evidently treat the game as a cultural artifact of "Japanese weirdness" rather than looking at it as a video game. As a result, many details are oversimplified or outright misleading. It's not ideal to prefer big-name sources just because they're more recognizable, especially when there are sources that specialize in this field and provide accurate insights.eh bien mon prince (talk) 11:42, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

One thing to point out, as you've expanded the reception, is that what the reviewers say should be grouped thematically per first point in MOS:VGREC. Minor parts of what you wrote already follow this.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 11:28, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback, I'll reorganize the section in line with MOS and adjust the paragraphs accordingly.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 18:42, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Princess_Maker_2&oldid=1335877431"