Talk:Kingdom Hearts III: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 00:31, 11 November 2011 editSineBot (talk \| contribs)Bots2,556,095 editsm Signing comment by 98.71.62.59 - "→Wait?: new section"← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 18:31, 30 March 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk \| contribs)Bots, Template editors2,304,379 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Kingdom Hearts III/Archive 1) (bot
(235 intermediate revisions by 88 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Old peer review\|ID=1085837672\|reviewedname=Kingdom Hearts III\|date=8 May 2022\|archive=N}}
	{{WikiProject Video games\|class=C\|importance=low}}
			{{Talk page header}}
	{{WikiProject Square Enix\|class=C\|importance=low}}
			{{not a forum\|Kingdom Hearts III}}
			{{Old AfD multi
			\| date = 11 March 2006
			\| result = '''Delete'''
			\| page = Kingdom Hearts III
			\| date2 = 6 June 2008
			\| result2 = '''Delete'''
			\| page2 = Kingdom Hearts III (video games)
			\| date3 = 21 September 2011
			\| result3 = '''Keep'''
			\| page3 = Kingdom Hearts III (2nd nomination)
			\| date4 = 19 June 2012
			\| result4 = '''Keep'''
			\| page4 = Kingdom Hearts III (3rd nomination)
			}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=B\|1=
			{{WikiProject Disney \|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Square Enix \|class=B \|importance=High}}
			{{WikiProject Video games \|class=B \|importance=Mid}}
			}}
			{{Old peer review\|archive = 1}}
			{{refideas
			\|1='']'' volume 593 (July 2015 issue), , , . (Contains a detailed interview with Tetsuya Nomura)
			\|2=https://www.famitsu.com/news/201802/11151608.html
			}}
			{{User:MiszaBot/config
			\|archiveheader = {{aan}}
			\|maxarchivesize = 100K
			\|minthreadsleft = 4
			\|minthreadstoarchive = 1
			\|counter = 1
			\|algo = old(30d)
			\|archive = Talk:Kingdom Hearts III/Archive %(counter)d
			}}

	== ~~Existence~~ ==		== Open-world? ==

			What is the consensus as to whether Kingdom Hearts III is an open-world game or not? Sources:
	Umm, should this page even ''exist''? I mean, there's nothing on it but rumours and speculation, which, as far back as I can remember, were not allowed on Misplaced Pages, unless the rules were changed suddenly. It even starts with unknown claims (like the platform and release date). I think this should just be redirected to ''Kingdom Hearts''. I'm putting up a vote, and I'm against this page. ] (]) 09:57, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
	:Even if it is never made, it is still ], because it has received significant coverage in third party ]. Plus, there is more then just "rumors and speculation". The whole first paragraph of the history section is official statements. Then there is a whole paragraph on reaction of the making of this game. <sub style="color:#00008B;">''']'''</sub> <sup>(]·])</sup> 14:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
	::Um, even though it has reliable sources, there's not enough material to deem it a separate article yet. These tidbits can be added to the main series page for Kingdom Hearts and even a sequel section for the Kingdom Hearts II article. This article should not exist yet. ♫ ] (]) 03:53, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
	:::The article is not much smaller than Chrono Break, a certified good article. It cannot even reasonably be argued that it does not fulfill the notability criteria - it has several references asserting not only its existence, but its sheer popularity as well. Considering the upcoming release of a video game that is directly linked to this game, news will obviously be on its way. But again, all of this is irrelevant due to the fact that size is not an aspect of determining notability. - ] ] ] 05:05, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
	::::As much as I play Kingdom Hearts, no official announcement has bee made only mentions in interviews, so this page shouldn't even excist] (]) 14:04, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
	:::::Things don't even have to exist to have articles. As long as there is coverage, it's fine. Its like those movies that get announced, and then fail in production, and are made again like 5 years later. An article with the history of what happened is useful to readers. <sub style="color:#00008B;">''']'''</sub> <sup>(]·])</sup> 14:09, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
	I agree, this page should be removed! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 01:36, 20 April 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	:Why? - ] ] ] 04:46, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
	::It's the apocalypse. Even anons know that Misplaced Pages isn't a ]! :) ] (]) 05:27, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
	:::WP:CRYSTAL says that "Misplaced Pages is not a collection of unverifiable speculation." This is '''verified''' speculation. Plus, two whole other thirds of the article that have nothing to do with speculation. History and Reaction. <sub style="color:#00008B;">''']'''</sub> <sup>(]·])</sup> 13:33, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
	Because it's not going to be released for a long while, and this isn't a site of speculation! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 23:29, 24 April 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			https://wegotthiscovered.com/gaming/kingdom-hearts-iii-review/
	:Aren't you actually the user ] (]) 23:32, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
	That isn't speculation, it's bound to happen, as Disney Owns Power Rangers rights! and if so, Marvel would be a speculation too! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 02:00, 25 April 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	:Speculation is educated guesses. So yes, what you are doing is speculation. - ] ] ] 10:18, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
	Well, If so, then so are you! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:51, 25 April 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	:How? At no point have I personally speculated on Kingdom Hearts III in the article. Being a reliable source, sites such as IGN can have their speculation used. - ] ] ] 22:02, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
	You say that Marvel Characters might appear, and that the world will end in 2012, That is Definatelly Speculation! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 02:15, 26 April 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	:You are strangely misreading everything we are saying. We never said that Marvel characters might appear. A reliable source commenting on the subject said it. Just because we write what they speculate does not make it our speculation. - ] ] ] 02:18, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
	Well they are speculation, and wikipedia does not put in Speculation! Unless it allows all of Them to be in IT! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 05:21, 26 April 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	:Yes it does. I do not see why it is this hard for you to understand that speculation from reliable sources is allowed while speculation from Misplaced Pages users is not. The reason speculation from users is not allowed is because if one user can speculate on content, all users can. The reason why speculation from reliable sources is used is because the people speculating are an expert in the field that they are speculating on. - ] ] ] 05:29, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

			https://www.pushsquare.com/reviews/ps4/kingdom_hearts_iii
	It's Not a speculation just from users, it's from many people, even people on youtube say It! And Power Rangers, just like Marvel is Disney so it's bound to happen! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 02:04, 29 April 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	:Stop adding this content. It is wrong, and unsourced. It is speculation by random people. This is not allowed. Everything in Misplaced Pages articles should be able to be sourced to a ]. ] is not allowed. If we included every silly thing everybody says, this article would be 5 miles long. <sub style="color:#00008B;">''']'''</sub> <sup>(]·])</sup> 02:11, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
	::Any "general person" is not a reliable source. There is no attribution to their comments, and no way to say that this speculation is based on anything, whereas speculation from IGN can be attributed to reliable people who are experts in their field. The point is that if it's not coming from a reliable source, it's not to be included. We do not allow just "any" speculation. - ] ] ] 02:15, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

			https://worthplaying.com/article/2019/1/29/reviews/112665-ps4-review-kingdom-hearts-iii/
	It is not wrong, and it will happen, I know it!! Fine, i'll find a source and show you! Really! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 03:00, 29 April 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			https://press-start.com.au/reviews/xbox-one/2019/01/25/kingdom-hearts-iii-review-astonishing-new-heights/
	Power Rangers is owned by ], not Disney. Disney sold it back to Saban last year. Now please stop adding Power Rangers to Disney articles. ] (]) 23:27, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

			https://wccftech.com/review/kingdom-hearts-iii-the-end-has-come/
	No, But Disney will buy it, and everything back! Really! They told me in C2E2, And Power Rangers does belong there, In Disney articles and everything! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 08:21, 1 May 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	Really! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 08:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			https://www.darkstation.com/reviews/kingdom-hearts-iii-review
	:Yeah, like your "imaginary friend at Disney" is a ] for things. Until you can find a proper source saying otherwise, things here stays as is. Any attempts to say otherwise without a reliable source will be considered trolling and/or vandalism. <span style="color:#0072C6;font-family:serif;text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">Sb617</span> <span style="color:#51528a;font-family:serif;text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;"> (])</span> 08:43, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

			https://gamecritics.com/steven-brown/kingdom-hearts-iii-review/
	It's Not Imaginary! They did talk to me at The Convention! But If you want a source, then fine i'll find one! And Kingdom Hearts isn't coming out for a long time just to let you know! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 08:55, 1 May 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			https://mashable.com/article/kingdom-hearts-3-review#Ph8SmV6Y_uqZ
	This page should be removed because its very existence is going to lead people to believe that such a project exists. A proper article title would be, "Speculation on Continuation of the Kingdom Hearts Franchise", or melded into a larger article titled, "Unconfirmed SquareEnix Games". I don't think either of those two articles should exist either, but they would be a lot more factual than listing the existence of something that the company in question declines to comment on.] (]) 17:09, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
	:A third Kingdom Hearts is in the lineup. It just isn't confirmed to be being developed yet. We aren't lieing. <sub style="color:#00008B;">''']'''</sub> <sup>(]·])</sup> 22:56, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

			https://www.thexboxhub.com/kingdom-hearts-iii-review/] (]) 10:19, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
	Who knows? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 04:00, 17 May 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			== Characters ==
	it's more than likely to be made since dream drop distance is being created and thats why they are not in the procces and are probably keep hush hush over time.i have witnessed it in many cases of movies and video games.trust me--] (]) 00:36, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

			When I tried trimming the article, I noticed there was a heavy focus of every character appearing in the game even though they are incredibly minor and thus are actually never mentioned in the plot section. As Favre1fan93 reverted my edits, I saw around 4,964 bytes being added, making it come across as undue weight and fancruft. Before reverting again, I think this should be discussed here. Cheers.] (]) 23:34, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
	Keep. http://uk.games.ign.com/articles/118/1181920p1.html practically confirms that the game will be made, by revealing that it will be the last game Xehanort is in. ] (]) 22:25, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

			:I definitely agree it needs some trimming. Content like "''The ] ] character returns as the ] shopkeeper''" is wikia-level stuff. ] ] 00:36, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
	== Rumor vs Rumour ==

			::I agree with your effort to trim. And if the editor who dispute your edits still believe in going into further detail about the characters, even the minor ones, I don't see why they couldn't refocus their efforts into expanding certain sections in ] instead. ] (]) 03:11, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
	I noticed an IP changed the heading from '''Rum<u>ou<u>rs and speculation''' to '''Rum<u>o<u>rs and speculation'''. Not knowing if I should revert I did a search and got five instances of 'rumour' and four of 'rumor', however one 'rumor' is in the Contents box due to the heading, and one in a reference. This suggests that in-article 'rumour' is favoured (or favored), so I've changed all to that for now (aside the reference for accuracy). I don't have a preference either way, I just wanted it consistant. ] (]) 09:31, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
			:::{{u\|Tintor2}} Kindly ping or notify me of a discussion like this since I'm involved. As I was unaware, I went to the article first per my notifications and watchlist, and which I believe is an acceptable compromise to remove the ] concerns. As I expressed, my main issue with the changes and gutting the section was the removal of the characters that are part of the gameplay experience ie the party members outside Donald and Goofy, as well as the Links character, two mechanisms discussed above the Characters section in Gameplay. As well, I restored noting how Yozora is introduced in this game, given the character's presumed prominence moving forward in at least ''IV'', as well as a restructure/c/e of the ''Final Fantasy'' info. - ] (]) 02:13, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
	:It's a spelling difference between American English and British English. Just like Airplane/Aeroplane, Color/Colour, etc. <sub style="color:#00008B;">''']'''</sub> <sup>(]·])</sup> 12:20, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

			== Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2022 ==
	== Wait? ==

			{{edit semi-protected\|Kingdom Hearts III\|answered=yes}}
	If there is going to be a romantic relationship between Sora and Kairi,wouldn'd that make Riku angry? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 00:30, 11 November 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
			Include information regarding the noticeably poorer critical response to the Nintendo Switch version as well as widespread published reports of low performance from the cloud based gameplay.

			https://www.polygon.com/reviews/22938608/kingdom-hearts-switch-cloud-version-review-performance

			https://www.nintendolife.com/reviews/switch-eshop/kingdom-hearts-iii-plus-re-mind-cloud-version

			https://www.pockettactics.com/kingdom-hearts/review ] (]) 10:28, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
			:] '''Not done:''' it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a ] if appropriate.<!-- Template:ESp --> ] (]) 10:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

			:{{ping\|2603:7081:453E:8100:45A2:DF5B:7446:2CF4}} I would do it but it kinda is hard to write reception sections of big games. I mean, we can't say "X says that" but instead write generilaztions.] (]) 22:25, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

			== Strange phrasing ==

			The article contains the following sentence: "''The possibility of a Nintendo Switch version of the game might be created, but wanted to focus on the development and promise of completing the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One versions was thought.''" This is also present in the archived, reviewed version of the article.
			There might be more instances of bad phrasing like this. I have no time to look into this now, and am not sure this is the right way to 'bookmark' the page for this purpose, but this very much has to do with improving the article, so it seems on topic. ] (]) 08:07, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:31, 30 March 2024

Kingdom Hearts III (final version) received a peer review by Misplaced Pages editors, which on 8 May 2022 was archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kingdom Hearts III article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find video game sources: "Kingdom Hearts III" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Kingdom Hearts III. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Kingdom Hearts III at the Reference desk.

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Keep, 19 June 2012, see discussion.
Keep, 21 September 2011, see discussion.
Delete, 6 June 2008, see discussion.
Delete, 11 March 2006, see discussion.

This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Disney Low‑importance

	Disney portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Square Enix High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Square Enix, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Square Enix-related merchandise and video games on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Square EnixWikipedia:WikiProject Square EnixTemplate:WikiProject Square EnixSquare Enix
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Video games Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Edi Birsan (2 participants)
Task Force: Ghost Team (4 participants)
Jack Manifold (2 participants)
Gameplay of World of Warcraft (5 participants)
Pokémon Trading Figure Game (3 participants)
Buff Technologies (3 participants)
Imakuni? (3 participants)
Tetr.io (7 participants)
Benedikt Johannes Hofer (6 participants)
Double Fine Comics (3 participants; relisted)
Westballz (4 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions No major discussions Featured content candidates

Good article nominations

DYK nominations

Sun Haven

Reviews and reassessments

Articles that need...

Kingdom Hearts III received a peer review by Misplaced Pages editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Dengeki PlayStation volume 593 (July 2015 issue), page 32-33, page 34-35, page 36-37. (Contains a detailed interview with Tetsuya Nomura)
https://www.famitsu.com/news/201802/11151608.html

Open-world?

What is the consensus as to whether Kingdom Hearts III is an open-world game or not? Sources:

https://wegotthiscovered.com/gaming/kingdom-hearts-iii-review/

https://www.pushsquare.com/reviews/ps4/kingdom_hearts_iii

https://worthplaying.com/article/2019/1/29/reviews/112665-ps4-review-kingdom-hearts-iii/

https://press-start.com.au/reviews/xbox-one/2019/01/25/kingdom-hearts-iii-review-astonishing-new-heights/

https://wccftech.com/review/kingdom-hearts-iii-the-end-has-come/

https://www.darkstation.com/reviews/kingdom-hearts-iii-review

https://gamecritics.com/steven-brown/kingdom-hearts-iii-review/

https://mashable.com/article/kingdom-hearts-3-review#Ph8SmV6Y_uqZ

https://www.thexboxhub.com/kingdom-hearts-iii-review/NickWX28 (talk) 10:19, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Characters

When I tried trimming the article, I noticed there was a heavy focus of every character appearing in the game even though they are incredibly minor and thus are actually never mentioned in the plot section. As Favre1fan93 reverted my edits, I saw around 4,964 bytes being added, making it come across as undue weight and fancruft. Before reverting again, I think this should be discussed here. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 23:34, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

I definitely agree it needs some trimming. Content like "The Final Fantasy Moogle character returns as the item shopkeeper" is wikia-level stuff. Sergecross73 msg me 00:36, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree with your effort to trim. And if the editor who dispute your edits still believe in going into further detail about the characters, even the minor ones, I don't see why they couldn't refocus their efforts into expanding certain sections in Characters of Kingdom Hearts instead. Haleth (talk) 03:11, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Tintor2 Kindly ping or notify me of a discussion like this since I'm involved. As I was unaware, I went to the article first per my notifications and watchlist, and restored another version which I believe is an acceptable compromise to remove the WP:LISTCRUFT concerns. As I expressed, my main issue with the changes and gutting the section was the removal of the characters that are part of the gameplay experience ie the party members outside Donald and Goofy, as well as the Links character, two mechanisms discussed above the Characters section in Gameplay. As well, I restored noting how Yozora is introduced in this game, given the character's presumed prominence moving forward in at least IV, as well as a restructure/c/e of the Final Fantasy info. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:13, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Include information regarding the noticeably poorer critical response to the Nintendo Switch version as well as widespread published reports of low performance from the cloud based gameplay.

https://www.polygon.com/reviews/22938608/kingdom-hearts-switch-cloud-version-review-performance

https://www.nintendolife.com/reviews/switch-eshop/kingdom-hearts-iii-plus-re-mind-cloud-version

https://www.pockettactics.com/kingdom-hearts/review 2603:7081:453E:8100:45A2:DF5B:7446:2CF4 (talk) 10:28, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@2603:7081:453E:8100:45A2:DF5B:7446:2CF4: I would do it but it kinda is hard to write reception sections of big games. I mean, we can't say "X says that" but instead write generilaztions.Tintor2 (talk) 22:25, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Strange phrasing

The article contains the following sentence: "The possibility of a Nintendo Switch version of the game might be created, but wanted to focus on the development and promise of completing the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One versions was thought." This is also present in the archived, reviewed version of the article. There might be more instances of bad phrasing like this. I have no time to look into this now, and am not sure this is the right way to 'bookmark' the page for this purpose, but this very much has to do with improving the article, so it seems on topic. JBeens (talk) 08:07, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Categories: