Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
In SpaceDrake's defense, they're right that those specific entries aren't minor quality-of-life tweaks; I didn't fully explain my deletions, and that's on me.
But I do still think that "more weapons" and "more monsters" are normal Sequel Escalation, not "Saving Throws" done in response to criticism.
There's also misindentation. =/
135 - 169 - 273 - 191 - 188 - 230 - 300
I definitely agree that the "more weapons and monsters" bit is just Sequel Escalation and that the entry is misuse. It should probably be deleted, but I'll hold off on that until other people weigh in on this issue.
I'll agree that this isn't a saving throw from Capcom. More weapons and monsters doesn't fix any of the problems from the 3DS game nor do they fix any problems the Switch game might have by itself or had inherited from the 3DS version.
Edited by Ngamer01
Well, I haven't played either game, but the one about weapon types does bring up how it was criticized in the first game and how it's improved in this one. I did read the linked article, and one thing it talks about was how people criticized the strategy of the first game. The third example ties it into that and talks about a way the game actively tried to expand on the strategy. So... the fourth one at least seems to make sense to me...
To my knowledge, the weapons weren't actively criticized in the first game; the criticisms were about the Tactical Rock–Paper–Scissors (the second point). Weapons were given different damage types in 2 to help add a layer of strategy that was lost when the RPS system was simplified, but the weapons themselves weren't the major problem in the first place.
Bumping to ask for more opinions on what should be done with the edit-warred entries, as well as what to do with the entry in general. Especially since we have a third-level bullet point which I'm pretty sure violates our rules on bullet points.
I'd move it to the discussion page pending a more complete discussion.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
I've created a discussion thread here
. Please weigh in if you can on what should be done about the entries.
A while ago, SpaceDrake
added this entry
to Author's Saving Throw on Monster Hunter Stories 2: Wings of Ruin.
The entry was deleted by DragonRanger
on grounds that the entry was not only too long, but described changes that were too minor to be counted as "saving throws." DragonRanger also brought up the issue in the Author's Saving Throw cleanup thread
.
Not long after DragonRanger removed the entry, SpaceDrake added the entry right back
with the edit reason "The weapons and monster selection are not "minor Qo L updates"; the weapon changes and expansion, in particular, changes how the game plays massively."
Edited by dragonfire5000