So, StarCraft Remastered is now a thing, which means that this wiki is going to have a lot of work on its hands. And by "wiki" I mean the lowly editors that I lord over and course correct, because that's my job, to be the boss. ;p
Snark aside, there are some things that the wiki is going to have to decide on, such as units, artwork, etc. This will be enshrined in respective policy articles, but I'm going to suggest the following guidelines, and get feedback on them:
- The game will of course get its own article, and be filled out as necessary.
- We shouldn't create new unit articles. As in, there shouldn't be a "Marine (StarCraft Remastered") article, as it's safe to assume that the stats will be the same. If they aren't the same, that might necessitate a new article, but under the premise that the units function as they did in the past, we can probably keep it to the one article.
- That does raise the question of images though, as to which should take priority. From the site, we can see that the units basically look the same, just sleaker, while in other cases, new artwork exists. We also know that comics will replace briefings. So, I have two suggestions, one for gameplay articles, one for lore articles:
- Lore: Lore articles are generally free to use what images editors want already, even though there's a preference for artwork over, say, unit sprites for instance. I figure that if Jim Raynor gets an updated look for instance, the new look should take precedence over the old look in respective sections of his article. That doesn't preclude us from using the old look as well if space permits, but our canon policy is basically that newer info trumps old, so in this case, new should take precedence.
- Gameplay: I actually favor keeping SC1 sprites in unit boxes, and showing the revamped models in galleries. There's no hard set reason for this, but I feel it works better, to use the baseline image, and then go "BTW, here's how it looks in the remastered version." I admit that's the opposite approach to lore, but in this case, it's the one I prefer.
- Also, on the subject of images, we should use a new coding, such as "Marine SCR Game1.jpg" or whatnot.
- Canon: Canon is a bit iffy in this case, as looking at the site, it does seem to accomadate new lore - for instance, Artanis is explicitly mentioned, rather than being called "the executor." In this case, new info should take precedence over old, but we should note the old info as well in articles as necessary. Basically standard practice. On a related note, we shouldn't have to create a new citation index for missions/cutscenes, unless the remastered version adds new info and/or diverges from previous material.
So, yeah, that's about it.--Hawki (talk) 06:51, March 26, 2017 (UTC)
- Some comments based on what we know so far:
- New stats shouldn't be a problem, the idea is the perfectly emulate the last version of Brood War with a few bug fixes. They haven't ruled out balance patches so we'll see, but I don't think we have to worry about problems with contradictory statistics for the time being. If they do, my vote is just do it like we do with different expansions in the SC2 unit articles, note it in the unit box when divergent.
- Personally I think the new images should go in the unit boxes over the SC1 ones, but I don't have a strong preference. In SC2 when a model received a graphical update we usually updated it when we noticed (a few we missed, we had old alpha ultralisk until LotV). Given how close the images are too I think anyone looking for SC1 stuff wouldn't be confused to see a higher res marine. In the case of lore articles though we usually just use concept art anyway so I doubt that'll be a problem.
- The comic interludes seem interesting. As far as the ramifications go for us, I think it means we get more article images. I am not sure what we're going to do with appearances contradicting one another (there's some brief hints they're leaning to going closer to SC2 appearances, I hope they still have bald Jim Raynor), but as far as lore goes I hope all they do is shed light on characters. Maybe we'll get to see the advisor characters for once.
- As far as citations go, I think we may need it for SCR comic briefings, but the rest should be fine. I'll get the base development article up today.--Subsourian (talk) 14:22, March 26, 2017 (UTC)
- The images one is a fair point, but in some cases, there's a lot of difference. For instance, the sprites are practically identical (though SCR has some nice added detail, such as the afterburners for marines), but in others, the unit portraits are completely different - at the least, I do know that the SCV unit profile looks very different. So, I'd be fine with updated sprites getting dibs in the unit boxes, but if there's a difference in unit portrait...well, maybe the new one should get priority. At the least, that would be consistent with SC2 images, as long as the SC1 images are kept in the gallery.--Hawki (talk) 21:14, March 26, 2017 (UTC)
- Kay, I've made some edits depending on circumstance. At least for now, I've held off on replacing the unit box images, because, using the SCV as an example, I've got a good portrait shot, but not so much a good unit shot, so the difference between them is jarring. Whatever does go in the unit box, both should come from the same game (graphically-speaking).--Hawki (talk) 21:48, March 26, 2017 (UTC)
- Yeah I certainly think the unit box images should stay as they are until the game launches even if we do have both, that way they don't end up changing at the last second and we forget and end up with an outdated version. All for adding them to the galleries though, I'll see what else I can find. Subsourian (talk) 00:37, March 27, 2017 (UTC)
So, I've given the SC1 hydralisk the remastered treatment, as I've managed to find a good shot of the unit with its portrait. And...yeah. Not fond of it. Subjective issues aside, on one hand, I appreciate that more recent images take precedent over earlier ones, but on the other, if we treat SCR images as akin to bonuses (like skins), then the old images should be the ones in the unit box, as they're effectively the standard ones.
Anyway, curious to get your thoughts, and anyone else's.--Hawki (talk) 07:51, March 31, 2017 (UTC)