Talk:Konami

Criticism section
I firmly believe that the Criticism section does not belong on this page. While there is something to be said about pointing out the extreme loss in popularity caused by their decision to shift to mobile games, everything else is based entirely in personal opinion and comes off very biased and fanboyish. Fan opinion does not belong on a Wiki article.  AlessaGillespie  Talk   Contributions  21:25, May 18, 2015 (UTC)


 * I firmly believe that crap decisions by crap publishing companies should be called out. I'll change the introduction sentence so it sounds less biased anyway. — Alex Shepherd   ツ  00:10, May 19, 2015 (UTC)


 * "Calling out" companies or people is absolutely not the function of a Wiki.That kind of stuff belongs on message boards, blogs, or opinion articles, but not here. The entire point of Wiki articles are to be unbiased, factual presentations of notable aspects of the subject matter. The entire Criticism section is unsourced, unfounded, and clearly extremely biased. One of the complaints pertains to such a minority of the fanbase that I haven't even heard of it before now, despite being part of the fandom for 8 years. No attempt is made to elucidate that every controversy has two sides, instead falling heavily on the side of blindly blaming Konami for everything after the release of 4. I do agree that there needs to be a section about the fallout of the cancellation of P.T. and the switch to mobile games, as this did heavily impact the company's stock and public image, but this section needs to be carefully written to avoid personal bias. Only verifiable facts from proven sources should be used, such as del Toro criticizing Konami for their "scorched earth" approach to P.T., or an article noting the fall in Konami's stock after the announcement. All the other points in the Criticism section, with the exception of the handling of the HD Collection, have not had much (if any) impact on Konami itself, and thus are non-notable.  AlessaGillespie  Talk   Contributions  05:04, May 20, 2015 (UTC)


 * Wikis actually have done "calling out" on companies in the past. If you go to BP or Monsanto on Wikipedia, they have entire sections on their failures - so I don't see why we can't do something similar for Silent Hill. Konami undeniably is responsible for driving Silent Hill into the ground. Plus the section does have references, and it's pretty blatant that Konami is responsible for Vatra Games rushing Downpour. I don't have any interviews at the moment though. Plus this is primarily a Silent Hill Wiki, *not* Konami Wiki, so Konami's relations (and failures) with the Silent Hill series should be a priority. — Alex Shepherd   ツ  06:59, May 20, 2015 (UTC)


 * There is no "calling out" on either the Monsanto or BP Wikipedia pages. Both of those pages have Controversy sections that are very neutral, presenting both sides of very public and well-known debates, with tons of official references. There is nothing in this page's Criticism section that even resembles that level of neutrality. Wiki pages can't be used to post lists of personal grievances, or we risk being seen as being even more biased and unprofessional than we are already accused of. Posting personal problems you have with Konami is a very slippery slope, which could easily open the door to anyone adding their own lists to the pages of any games/movies/creators they don't like to air their own grievances. Imagine what Hulett's page would look like. That is precisely why neutrality, notability, and sources are key to maintaining a fair Wiki.


 * Right now, the only two notable issues are Konami's recent actions and the HD snafu, because they both affected a majority of the fanbase. The disbanding of Team Silent didn't create a well-sourced outcry, so it would be next to impossible to include that in the article without it being a bunch of fan opinion. Similarly, I know of no official sources proving Konami rushed DP, so that would be entirely fan speculation. Whether Cihi was notified about the re-release or not is extremely controversial, and is already mentioned on both his and the HD Collection's pages. The Steam issue is so minor that I've never heard of it before now, and seems to be a personal problem for just a few fans. Like I said before, a section covering the controversies of the HD Collection and P.T. is definitely notable enough for inclusion, but everything else belongs somewhere better suited for the airing of personal opinions and grievances.  AlessaGillespie  Talk   Contributions  07:40, May 20, 2015 (UTC)


 * I changed a few things, I think it's OK now. And speaking as a fan since before the movie came out in '06 (Team Silent disbanded in '04), there was definitely a fan outcry. It's just difficult to pull up message boards from a decade ago, but I'd say a vast majority of long-time fans are salty about Konami disbanding Team Silent, which is a very valid point of criticism. — Alex Shepherd   ツ  08:13, May 20, 2015 (UTC)


 * ...All you did was change the title. It's still a list of personal grievances with few sources and no attempt at neutrality.  AlessaGillespie  Talk   Contributions  08:35, May 20, 2015 (UTC)


 * Is it even possible to be "neutral"? Konami is a crappy publisher, there's no way to beat around the bush and defend their actions. And yeah, it is a list of fan grievances with Konami, that's... kind of the point. It's not just *me*, a majority of Silent Hill fans are annoyed at Konami. There's tons of evidence for this on Silent Hill Reddit, NeoGAF, etc. — Alex Shepherd   ツ  09:21, May 20, 2015 (UTC)
 * It is possible, and imperative, to be neutral. To not be is to violate absolutely everything that Wikipedia and Wikia stand for. Look at how many people hate Monsanto, yet their Wikipedia article still has an unbiased and well-sourced Controversy section covering notable controversies that heavily affected their public image. There should be mention of the HD Collection and P.T. scandals, since those are well-sourced and actually did affect their image quite a bit. Everything else are controversies that most of the fanbase can't even agree on, and that barely affected the company at all. One of them isn't even a controversy. With a petition boasting a grand total of 41 signatures, the Steam issue seems to be cared about by roughly 1% of 1% of 1% of the total estimated fanbase. That's not even sort of notable. Lists of complaining are not acceptable. If you must keep the section in, then strive to make it like the Monsanto article. We've already been accused of bias repeatedly - it does not help to so flagrantly display it now.  AlessaGillespie  Talk   Contributions  10:02, May 20, 2015 (UTC)


 * "and that barely affected the company at all"
 * Sure, it may not affect *KONAMI*, but it affects Silent Hill's status as a quality franchise, and this *is* Silent Hill Wiki. I added "points of criticism" to the title. And Konami's failure to do anything with the PC releases of the series via digital distribution (sans Homecoming) is a valid point of criticism, especially now that video game releases are becoming more digital and less physical. — Alex Shepherd   ツ  11:13, May 20, 2015 (UTC)


 * Changing the title does nothing. You are using the Wiki as your personal platform to air your grievances, and I am not okay with that. I understand why you're angry at Konami, but that vendetta does not belong here. If you don't do so first, I will be editing the article to remove non-notable content and bias when I get home from work tonight.  AlessaGillespie  Talk   Contributions  11:35, May 20, 2015 (UTC)


 * I didn't just change the title, I added references. I feel every point is a valid and notable point of criticism. Losing the SOURCE CODE to one of the most important games in the series? Disbanding the original team which made the series so successful? Rushing the game developer on one of the major releases, leading it to be filled with glitches and bugs? All notable. Do what you must, I just don't want it becoming "Konami is an awesome company where nothing bad ever happens to its franchises.", and I don't think the wiki should reflect that front. — Alex Shepherd   ツ  16:47, May 20, 2015 (UTC)


 * The point is to be neutral, not to swing the bias pendulum in the other direction. I left out the part about Team Silent's removal for a few reasons: A) it's a topic that almost no one can agree upon, with purists taking one side and everyone else the other. B) it could easily slide into degrading the new teams and developers, and C) it gets into the East vs West debate and its casual racism, which I don't want to see gain a foothold here. The Steam issue was removed because there simply are not enough people to whom the issue matters. I appreciate that this is an issue near and dear to your heart, but a 41 person petition makes it a very tiny drop in the bucket. Sections were given for both the HD Collection and the cancellation of Silent Hills. I tried my best to avoid any bias, simply posting the facts.  AlessaGillespie  Talk   Contributions  06:19, May 21, 2015 (UTC)


 * (sigh) Okay. I'll just format it a bit better. — Alex Shepherd   ツ  06:23, May 21, 2015 (UTC)