Talk:Mega Man

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Current revision as of 02:16, 20 August 2025

[edit] Mega Man is an NES staple

Hi @RickTommy, In response to this edit, I can only surmise that you're not very familiar with the NES:

• All Editions of Mega Man from Mega Man 1 through Mega Man 7, even Mega Man X through Mega Man X3 all were released in the NES or SNES.
• The Mega man franchise did not migrate to playstation until 1997, and the graphics in those game look vastly different. The reason I mention this is that Stinkoman basically resembles the Nintendo version of the Mega Man series.

Therefore, I believe that it is incorrect to say that the Mega Man series has nothing to do with Nintendo, let alone its place in the H*R universe. For that reason I've partially unreverted your partial rv. I've brought this here for discussion if you believe this to be in error. --Stux 03:52, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Excuse me? Being a Nintendo fan, I most certainly am familiar with the NES (despite having never actually played a NES game on the original hardware in my life, not to mention having been born after its time as the newest console). As the user who created the Nintendo category, I (n)intended it to cover only Nintendo and its first- and second-party franchises (another words, developed by Nintendo itself or a company owned by it (or at least has always made the relevant games only for Nintendo's consoles)). RickTommy (edits) 07:37, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

I mostly side with RickTommy here. Capcom, and Namco for that matter, being a third-party developer means the three articles in question—Mega Man, Street Fighter, and Namco— shouldn't be in the Nintendo category. Perhaps if there were an NES or SNES games category, as the case may be, the games could fit there, but as the categories are set up currently, I disagree with them being in the Nintendo category. I should also note that, while they were originally released on the NES, later rereleases (and not just the ones with a different look) have been multiplatform, releasing on Sony and Microsoft consoles in addition to Nintendo.

Nintendo Power is a different case— it was published by a direct subsidiary of Nintendo, so it would be first-party, but on the other hand, the Nintendo category itself is in the "Video game references" category, which doesn't seem apt for an out-of-universe interview. DEI DAT VM^┌_{datvm center}\^{super contra}_┘ 09:25, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

@RickTommy: thank you for explaining your rationale. Your edits make a lot more sense in that context. It may not be a perspective and interpretation I share, but it's certainly a consistent interpretation I can respect.

Also, thanks @DEIDATVM for linking to the WP article outlining video game tiers that strictly defines these types. I was only vaguely aware of "Second tier" as a formal type of game developer.

Now, for the overall matter of what's to be included in the category:

My interpretation of the category was far wider than that: I took "relating to Nintendo" to mean anything relating to Nintendo, its games, its franchises and its affiliates, third party developers, etc. Kind of like how the new Videlectrix category covers everything relating to the company. From my point of view, I think this also means that the category is missing categories. I've gone ahead added Category:Real Companies to this and to Category:Atari since I believe that is an appropriate relationship to add. I suspect there are other articles that should belong in that category as well.

Turns out this is the case: I've added Namco, LucasArts, Sega, Sierra, Sony, Texas Instruments.

Basically, I do believe there's enough room here to have a much broader interpretation of what this category covers. I've even found other pages that are missing from this category (mainly WiiWare and Mario Paint items, but also Category:Nintendo Channel!)

With all that said, I do think there is enough room to add an "NES + SNES" games category or a "third party developers" category. I'm not sure which one would be better. (Or if we needed both? Though then there would be some overlap, but that might be okay?) --Stux 13:06, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

I am bringing in the discussion that extended into Talk:Namco for reference:

The reason I added the Nintendo and Atari categories are specific and even explained in my edit summary:

• Pac-Man is a huge Namco game, with its own article even, which was both played in arcades and the Atari consoles. Pole position was also release for the Atari.
• Galaga, Xevious, Dig dug) do have NES or other Nintendo releases.

So, I do not understand what "not first party" is referring to in the edit summary. To me, I believe Namco is relevant to Nintendo and Atari and were first party to the success of those consoles. That is the reason I unreverted the rv. --Stux 04:14, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Ditto again. See here for a more detailed explanation. RickTommy (edits) 07:48, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

I see that @RickTommy quietly removed the Nintendo Category from this page and from the Namco page. I, personally, disagree with both edits for the reasons stated above. Having grown up using an NES, the fact that Namco is a "third tier" video game developer makes no difference with regards to games from that era. Especially not with Mega Man. As I mentioned above, all or nearly all references to Mega man in Stinkoman are from the Nintendo console. It strikes me as very odd that Mega Man isn't even associated with the Nintendo console. Well, actually, it is. There's a "see also" link to Nintendo on the page. So why not include the Nintendo Category as well?

Since it seems I am the only person who thinks that 3rd party developers should not be part of the Nintendo Category, I'd like to propose an alternative: a new category could be created for "3rd party Nintendo Developers" and those developers can be added to that category. Another would be an "NES and SNES games" category(ies) as DEIDATVM proposed. Either way it doesn't gel with me that minimal associations are made between Mega Man and Nintendo. --Stux 02:03, 20 August 2025 (UTC)