Ask The Tropers

thanks Tropers/Nethilia for making the topic! I'm glad we've been able to flesh out the AWL pages more together and I'm enjoying working in harmony, I'm also eager to know the answer to this. I'll add my thoughts too.

Sorry for the length, eager to have some clarification and happy to follow whatever the best practice is.

Thanks so much.

Bump—it's been a few days.

It seems like a straightforward remake for a new console. IMO, unless a multiverse/timelines/etc. is stated to exist within the work (as is the case with Pokémon), those shouldn't be brought up when troping since that'd be speculative. So it's okay to compare elements of this work with the original but not assume the creators did a clever timeline thing where both verses coexist.

There's no multiverse named in game—it's a straightforward remake.

Thanks so much for the reply, 𝕋𝕒𝕓𝕤)! Since there's no multiverse/timelines existing in game, I removed the reference to it in the example trope.

I have one follow up question on the applicability of tropes from the original games to the remake:

In this case where it's a straightforward remake, the devs have stated their practice was to leave as much of the original characterization unchanged as possible...I wasn't sure whether it would be prudent to assume confirmation given when the game first released by the creators in guidebooks, interviews and manuals still applies unless otherwise stated, or if each thing must be re-confirmed for each remake character (assume still true unless otherwise stated vs. assume untrue until confirmed).

For example. a character is heavily implied to be an adopted child through dialogue, environmental clues, and piecing together character backstories. The official guidebook for the original game confirmed he's not their biological child. For the remake, all the same clues and implications are there, but the creator of the characters— who confirmed these things in the official guidebook for the original— is no longer with the company. Should we treat this kind of thing as unconfirmed for the remake version of the character and avoid mentioning it, or assume continuity of the character between games since the storyline itself is still there?

Thanks so much!

That also feels Word of God like, if it came from the creator and there's no official guidebook for this version. It's not 100% a straightforward remake, or say, Cody/Gordy wouldn't be a bachelor and neither would Lumina, since she was an expansion from the PS2 Game.

Also it feels like Tabs said that the situation is that the speculation would be assuming that the older games apply to the new as well. So I moved the data to be under Easter Egg so it's still preserved.

Ah, looks like we interpreted Tabs’ direction in two different ways, Nethilia. Sorry about that.

If Tabs meant “the agreement is that this game is its own separate "place" and comparisons are legit between this and the GC one, but not assumptions that DS happened for the Switch one” as you noted in your edit, Nethilia, then I must be misunderstanding Tabs’ post.

To be clear, Tabs, I understood your words as saying we shouldn’t assume multiple timelines and universes if the game doesn’t include those concepts, so while we can compare the changes between the original and the remake, assuming those changes indicate SOSAWL and AWL are on separate coexisting timelines/universes/what-have-yous would be speculative. I apologize if I’ve misconstrued these words.

Since there’s a difference in what the two of us understood, I’ll hold off on making any additional changes based on my own interpretation until Tabs clarifies for us.

And Nethilia, my own understanding on what you’ve brought up is this: The NPC Gordy becoming romanceable is a relatively minor change. The Special Edition that remade the game for the PS 2 and made NPC Lumina romanceable (along with many other changes) is accepted to still be the same cast of characters and setting as AWL for Game Cube regardless of that change, not a game in its own separate “place” isolated by the AWL canon thus far.

I’m having trouble seeing the AWL remake as being in its own self contained “place” with a “Gordy” who is romanceable being distinct from the “Gordy” who is Goldy’s ancestor. That feels like another multiverse situation minus the name— it creates a situation where there’s two Gordys, despite the production team speaking of remake AWL Gordy as being the same guy as OG AWL Gordy. The connection between AWL and the DS characters as descendants is stated clearly in canon, but I’ve seen no basis for the AWL remake’s characters being distinct from the original AWL’s characters.

Thanks for preserving the data Nethilia! Sorry for the continued confusion, but, I’m looking forward to having this cleared up so we can continue to enjoy working together.

Correct- you may use interviews, guidebooks, etc. as Trivia entries, but the tropes for the games should be information found in the games. Another player could identify the tropes without needing side materials. Right about this point as well:

Something that applies to the original (side materials or not) shouldn't be assumed to apply in the remake (remakes can take liberties, right?) unless the remake also gives the same info and has its own side materials saying so.

So to sum it up, if it's not in the game by itself, it's considered trivia, even if it's in say, an interview on another site or a guide for the Japanese games (older or newer)? (There's almost no US players guides anymore.)

Thank you and seconding the question, I’m still a bit confused, sorry. Should any “All There in the Manual” for even the original AWL be moved to its Trivia page (EX: official character ages and tropes related to them since the ages are in the JP official guidebook/ a different set of ages in the English manual? Those are currently on the Character page for the original game. And the protagonists' canon names since those names are only used in promotional material? They are listed on the Characters pages for both the original game and the remake)? It’s a game originally from 20 years ago, and for this title supplemental material like the official JP guidebooks + EN manuals + bonus materials from other games in the franchise contain a large amount of significant, plot relevant info about the characterizations in the original game that is not explicitly spelled out in game.

In any case, using the adoptee example, the info in game is so strong for that case to the point there were already preexisting entries on the trope page for Adoption Angst and on the works page for the original game using just the info from the original game. (the info being everything short of literally bluntly saying “He’s not their biological son”) So I’ll follow that example with the remake given that all the same in-game info is there— is that right?

Thanks so much for all the help and I apologize for the length of my questions. I want to make sure I thoroughly understand so I can be on the same page with everyone and properly categorize info without causing more work.

Hmm, All There is not marked Trivia, so it's a trope. So the trope/character page of whichever game it pertains to. If the guidebook is for the original, just the original.

If the hints are strong enough in the remake, then yes, you may apply the remake info to the remake's page. Pretend you never played the original when applying tropes that don't compare original with remake.

Yeah, there's no guidebook for the remake outside of Japan. So I'd think that those tropes that are in a Japanese guidebook don't apply to the English release, because it'd require someone having access to the Japanese book.

ETA: It's also the same for internal files, because not everyone has access to the internal files of the game or text dumps. The average person playing the game would have that game and maybe some outside sites, but those don't count.

Thank you, 𝕋𝕒𝕓𝕤)! I really appreciate your clarification! I'll be sure to delineate between original and remake when making entries, and I'll adopt that "amnesia" mindset when I'm not writing stuff explicitly comparing the original with the remake. That's really helpful!!

Nethilia), I'm not sure I follow you regarding the guidebook and etc but I do want to be in sync with you. May I just hash down my understanding of Tabs directives re: the query topic of "applicability of tropes to original vs. remake" to make sure I'm in sync with you on the main topic before we move to the new topics raised?

I'll put my thoughts in folders again but if we should discuss elsewhere please let me know.

My feeling is that if something is only articulated in the Japanese guide book, it should definitely be noted as having come from that, since there's no English guidebook outside of the little basic manual that comes with the game (and US players don't get those cool guides anymore). So like, if the Japanese SOS:AWL book says that 100% Rock is adopted, that's more like interesting trope trivia that should be noted on the trope, but not said "it's true because it's in the Japanese book". Same with ages. There's no confirmation it's 100% true in the English version of the game—because while it's true in Japan, there's no English version that says that, and not everyone who's gonna play can access those books easily. So it's implied and we should look at what the game offers first and the other manuals second, which still heavily leans that way. There's cultural differences that might not carry over, so it's really important to state that these things are from the Japanese version.

So while the Japanese book data should be discussed, what it says isn't something that the average English player can easily get, so it's more like trivia than full confirmation.

ETA: The short version is that there's always good reason to cite things from the Japanese guidebooks, since they provide insight—but the facts added ought to state that it's from those, so it's not mistaken as something from an English one which we don't have. Things should be said, but stated that it's from Japanese books. Sorry if I was unclear.

With text dumps, I correct myself cause I said the wrong thing. I meant it more like "if the text dump says something that was Dummied Out, then it's not applicable, because it's not part of the game." So like if a scene that got fully cut was mentioned, it wouldn't be factual—but data from the games still is, since presumably all that text is in the game, you just might not see it all unless you do a lot of playthroughs. This is why Developer's Foresight counts in games, because someone can look at a text dump and see something that they might not trigger otherwise. (so like in Story of Seasons (2014), there's different text if your player and the person you marry share a birthday, which you can only see if you pick the one they have from the start.) So go ahead and put the data about the Japanese names and info from the text files back!

I 100% agree on properly specifying what material we're citing from and what language it's in!

Okay, I apologize if I'm misunderstanding here— if you're saying info from the JP guide would confirm things in the JP version but ought to be viewed as trope trivia for the EN version of the same game, I don't know how we can mandate that or assign a value there. Going down the Video Games section on All There In the Manual, it appears that noting that something is confirmed in an official JP guidebook with words like confirmed or revealed or canon— including in cases where that's the only explicit confirmation for something implied in-game— is an accepted practice. I'll make sure to note that it's the Japanese guide.

You make a wonderful point, cultural differences also are extremely relevant here— child adoption (of a non-relative) is still seriously taboo in Japan compared to the west. In Japan adopted children are expected to hide it— because of the importance placed on bloodlines, the societal stigma against illegitimate and adopted children is way more intense. So it might be confusing to Western audiences what the big deal is / why everyone just dances around the topic. There's similar cases of this kind of audience split in works like Persona 5, so there's something for Values Dissonance probably (along with the arranged marriages that were also left intact for the English version)

I understand your reasoning that it's more difficult for English players to access the JP sources. That's why I think it's important for those of us who do have access to them to make the info more accessable overseas.

Re: the text dumps: Oh! I understand now, thank you so much for clarifying. I think those Developer's Foresight examples are awesome! A ton of the dialogue in AWL has strange trigger conditions, so there's a ton of stuff that can appear in game that most people never see. (EX: if you didn't trigger the bathtime scene in Chapter 2, the bathtime scene in Chapter 5 has your kid sound a lot lonelier) Okay, I'll put them back. Thanks so much!!

Okay, I apologize if I'm misunderstanding here— if you're saying info from the JP guide would confirm things in the JP version but ought to be viewed as trope trivia for the EN version of the same game, I don't know how we can mandate that or assign a value there. Going down the Video Games section on All There In the Manual, it appears that noting that something is confirmed in an official JP guidebook with words like confirmed or revealed or canon— including in cases where that's the only explicit confirmation for something implied in-game— is an accepted practice. I'll make sure to note that it's the Japanese guide.

I think that's all that needs to be done—if something's only from the Japanese guide—which is the only guide we have—it just ought to say that's where it came from. I apologize, I always thought All There in the Manual only meant accessable manuals, not say, Japanese ones that aren't translated.

Thanks for being understanding with me—I considered a Japanese guide for myself since I can kind of understand Japanese, but the costs are so high! So I appreciate your adding details from it.

Awesome! And no worries at all. Thank you so much for being patient and understanding with me as well. I added the data about the Japanese names and game files back, glad to have everything clarified.