Talk:Fez (video game)

Fez (video game) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

Fez (video game) is the main article in the Fez series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 13, 2017.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 30, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed
September 25, 2014	Good topic candidate	Promoted
October 20, 2014	Featured article candidate	Promoted
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 12, 2014. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Eurogamer described their 2012 game of the year, Fez (cover art pictured), as like a surreal, Shigeru Miyamoto version of 2001: A Space Odyssey?
Current status: Featured article

Video games: Indie High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. 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 articles

High

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

This article is supported by the indie task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Alientrap (0 participants)
Hyperbeard Games (0 participants)
List of video games with gyro features (0 participants)
Flemeth (1 participant)
List of Epic Games Store giveaways (4 participants)
Lola Panda (0 participants)
Amiga Active (1 participant)
Kiboy (gamer) (4 participants)
Goodboy Galaxy (3 participants)
Double Eleven (company) (1 participant)
Backflip Studios (2 participants)
HLSW (4 participants)
Vii (4 participants)
Small Worlds (presentation) (5 participants)
Petpet Park (2 participants)
List of Android games (9 participants)
Spaceballs (demogroup) (1 participant; relisted)
A Date with Death (6 participants; relisted)
Giant Squid (company) (2 participants; relisted)
The Wizard Sniffer (6 participants; relisted)
The Wayward Realms (4 participants; relisted)
Haytham Kenway (10 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

File:FEZ trial gameplay HD.webm to appear as POTD soon[edit]

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:FEZ trial gameplay HD.webm will be appearing as picture of the day on October 17, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-10-17. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:05, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the day

A video from the trial mode for Fez, an indie puzzle-platform video game developed by Polytron Corporation and published by Trapdoor in 2012. In this game, the player-character Gomez receives a fez that reveals his two-dimensional world to be one of four sides of a three-dimensional world. The player must rotate between these four 2D views to realign platforms and solve the game's puzzles.Video: Polytron Corporation

Archive – More featured pictures...

Proposed merge of Development of Fez into Fez (video game)#Development[edit]

CLOSED

No merging of article(s) at this time per split discussion. Both proponents and opponents of the merge make good points, and the articles SIZE issues are thoroughly discussed here, but size is not the only issue. WEIGHT should also be a consideration in this proposal. Combining these articles would make an article with almost half of it devoted to just one aspect of the game itself; namely, its development. Normally a fan of not splitting articles if at all possible, I don't see merging as a solution here, without the gutting of the development article, per SUMMARY. This could be done (possibly at the cost of removing some reliably sourced information from that article), and I personally would not object to the merging at that point. That may be considered in the future, but for now, the articles should remain separate. Non-Administrative closure-- GenQuest ^"scribble" 14:56, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

There doesn't really appear to be a reason why this development article, with a massive WP:OVERLAP, needs to be separate from the article on the main game. To be sure, I am a fan of FEZ, but this feels like overkill when a fairly long and detailed development and design section already exists. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:52, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The development itself, wrapped in the celebrity of its developer, is covered in extreme length by reliable, independent sources [1][2][3] and was the primary subject of an ensemble documentary. The split article contains detail/depth that would be overkill to cover in the main (featured) article, which already has the core information readers would need to know about the subject. The split article exists to expand on that with detail befitting an independently notable sub-subject. czar 13:04, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per CZAR. Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 22:35, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The game's page is about 50k of prose, the development page is about 30k. Give about 5k of summary of the development in the game's page, such that the merged page would be about 75k of prose. That's just at a point for WP:SIZE where splitting is suggested, but not "required". I would lean to keep based on this. See notes below, I was using the wrong measurement. --Masem (t) 00:31, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. To be honest, I'm not seeing much in the development article that can't be covered here. This article's only 21kB of readable prose, and Development of Fez is only 14kB. Together, that'd be 35kB, hardly large enough to justify a split—and it'd probably be smaller, once repeated text is accounted for. We discussed the "Development of" articles at MOS:VG fairly recently and there was general agreement that it should only be done in extraordinary circumstances. This doesn't strike me as one of those. JOE BRO ⁶⁴ 20:36, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I got much higher numbers on prose size. Which tool are you using to count? Masem (t) 21:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:Prosesize reports those numbers as "readable prose size". IceWelder [✉] 21:59, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Got it, I was using like the second number in the list, not that lower one. I would have to agree then that the merged page would not be a SIZE problem on that. Masem (t) 22:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, per Joebro64. I'm also not seeing much in the Development of Fez article that can't be included here or isn't already included here. Additional comment: If this article is merged, then the Fez good topic will cease to exist. Not that that matters, but it's something to note. NegativeMP1 21:52, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The Development article meets the notability requirements, and would take up a lot of space in the main article. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:47, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Seems like a decent SIZE splitoff and there's sufficient coverage of the topic. SnowFire (talk) 06:10, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I don't think SUMMARY is being well followed in the development section, and could easily be covered in the parent article. There aren't SIZE issues even if they were merged in their entirety. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 18:30, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. Having read through the article, it would not be too large to be merged into Fez, per SUMMARY as stated above. Nobody expects the UnexpectedSmoreInquisition (talk)! 13:02, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.