Talk:Silent Hills

P.T.'s significance for making gamers come together and discuss answers

Hideo Kojima claimed that he believed that no one could solve P.T.'s last "puzzle" for at least a week. Although it was actually beaten on the day of the teaser's release, P.T. forced the gaming community to come together and discuss the solution (a form of crowdsourcing for information). This lead to a group of friends actually finding a definitive solution to the final puzzle. Should we include P.T.'s impact on the gaming community in the P.T. section? —017Bluefield (talk) 20:04, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply and nice to meet you, 016Bluefield. I think that depends on what kind of sources we can find. Here's a list of reliable sources specific to video game articles. I'll see what I can find. Maybe Hula Hup (talk · contribs) dug some up already? Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 23:02, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Taking into account the reports of Guillermo saying the game's not happening, it might be worth just making this an article about P.T., since it's a thing that we know exists. Wonchop (talk) 22:36, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Wonchop, I took it upon myself to make a separate article about P.T. This should remain an article about the cancelled game, as it was in existence at some point in time; even if it wasn't complete.TJD2 (talk)

I wish there had been a little more discussion about the split, because I don't really see the point of having a separate article for P.T. with the same information, split up into sections. I don't think there's enough information out there to warrant a separate page, to be honest. At the very least, there needs to be some attribution per this policy.(I would have done it myself, but I don't know what version TJD2 used and didn't want to make assumptions.) Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 21:00, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Director

It says Kojima is directing it, but there has been no confirmation whatsoever as to who is directing the game. He could just be producing together with Del Toro. 91.5.11.242 (talk) 16:56, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi 91.5.11.242 and nice to meet you! :) You have a valid point. Most of the sources I found agree that Kojima and del Toro are working together on Silent Hills, but only GamesRadar explicitly named them as directors. Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 21:37, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Kojima no longer works for Konami, so I doubt he'll be director of this game. 113.162.118.92 (talk) 14:52, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

We don't know that for sure, since Konami and Kojima haven't said anything about the latter leaving. We're probably going to have to wait until MGS5 is released before we know for sure. Sonictrey (talk) 04:28, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Cancellation?

I think people are jumping the gun here saying that Silent Hills is cancelled. Has there even been official confirmation in it being scrapped yet? I've been seeing people say its just a rumor right now. GamerPro64 18:22, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Norman Reedus on Twitter. BlookerG ^talk 22:49, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm going to be completely outraged if Silent Hills is really cancelled. Gjlewis (talk) 23:09, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

It has not been confirmed as cancelled, this isn't how articles are suppose to be run on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.31.109 (talk) 02:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

It has now Wonchop (talk) 14:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

It has not http://www.gamespot.com/articles/konami-responds-to-silent-hills-cancellation-claim/1100-6426908/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:0:1029:7:7C77:19CA:C6A6:9086 (talk) 21:47, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

The link you just offered said the game was cancelled. Kinda invalidated your own argument. GamerPro64 21:56, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

The link I just offered updated about 10 minutes ago, confirming. There was no confirmation before that :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:0:1029:7:7C77:19CA:C6A6:9086 (talk) 22:07, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Proposed merge with P.T. (demo)

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.

---

Since P.T. is the demo for Silent Hills. I don't really think that it is necessary for P.T. to have another page. AdrianGamer (talk) 09:27, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

It's not technically the demo FOR Silent Hills, it is a teaser of what may or may not have been in the game. It is it's own separate entity thus I feel it deserves it's own article.TJD2 (talk) 10:24, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I think it should be merged. I don't see the point of having a separate article for P.T. with the same information, split up into sections. I don't think there's enough information out there to warrant a separate page, to be honest. At the very least, there needs to be some attribution per this policy on the P.T. article.(I would have done it myself, but I don't know what version TJD2 used and didn't want to make assumptions.) Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 14:43, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

• Merge The P.T. article doesn't give any new information that's already stated in the Silent Hills article, unless the P.T. article expands and goes in greater depth then there's no need for another article. TheDeviantPro (talk) 06:02, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Support merge, WP:MERGEREASON states that one of the proper reasons to make a merge is because, "There are two or more pages on exactly the same subject, with the same scope". As others pointed out, the P.T. article basically holds the same sources and information found on the Silent Hills article. It would be redundant to have two separate pages with the same sources and information when it can be directed to one page. P.T. is a variation of Silent Hills, after all. Armegon (talk) 07:42, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

*Merge. P.T. doesn't offer any new or different information than Silent Hills; the gameplay and reception can easily be put into Silent Hills's subsection on P.T.. --Soetermans. T / C 11:27, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

• Merge. Any information on P.T. can be sufficiently covered in the Silent Hills. We don't need a split for what is essentially a demo. --The1337gamer (talk) 11:01, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

• Merge. I do not think it is (technically) necessary separate article for this game. Playable teaser is not a common marketing as game demo is for video games, so there is not enough information to fit an own article, therefore it is better these information displayed on Silent Hills until playable teaser become a standard for gamer designers to show their work. Carlosguitar ^{(Yes Executor?)} 21:43, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

• Merge – Piling on here. There's pretty much a snowball consensus on this. Might as well make it official. GamerPro64 14:34, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

• • Changing to don't merge With the stuff going on with P.T. in the last couple of days I think having a separate article does make sense. Now that P.T. can't be re-downloaded (Kotaku, GameSpot, Game Informer, Polygon). After that, Kotaku: "Konami sucks", Polygon: "P.T. listings hit eBay pre-installed on PS4s for more than $1,500", and GameSpot wrote a tribute and did a feature on Konami (also of course with Kojima's leaving and MGS). A whole lot of news, more about P.T. and the controversy than it is actually about Silent Hills. --Soetermans. T / C 10:50, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I might agree. Sources are proving notability regarding controversy of its removal and the eBay scandal. The key is just adding more information to make it not a content fork of this article. Also even though it's called a demo. It was never the same game of the cancelled game. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 21:48, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I'd be interested to know if AdrianGamer (talk · contribs), GamerPro64 (talk · contribs), The1337gamer (talk · contribs), TheDeviantPro (talk · contribs), Rapunzel-bellflower (talk · contribs) have a different opinion with these latest developments. --Soetermans. T / C 23:11, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't think the new information still won't be enough for P.T. to have it's own separate article, as the information can be easily included in the P.T. section of the Silent Hills article. We can included the information about P.T. not be able to re-downloaded and the eBay incident in a few short paragraphs, I also found that Kotaku's Konami Sucks, Gamespots tribute and The State of Konami articles doesn't really have any information that benefits the article. TheDeviantPro (talk) 01:13, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Soetermans and thanks for all your hard work! :) I'd have to agree with TheDeviantPro. I feel that this new information could be easily summarized in a paragraph. Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 02:00, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I still think the new info falls under the scope of Silent Hills, it's directly related to the cancellation of the game. So I stand by merging P.T. --The1337gamer (talk) 11:04, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

*Rewrite I think the new information about the topic is enough to warrant it's own article. P.T. is it's own separate entity from Silent Hills; though maybe it doesn't seem that way with the way it's currently written in certain sections. There is definitely enough information out there to separate it from Silent Hills I know that much.TJD2 (talk) 18:35, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

• Do not merge, this is considered one of the scariest experiences in gaming and was not supposed to exist in the game. Essential a teaser game of its own. Now the the real game has been cancelled this is more notable as a standalone. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 06:43, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Great point Valoem! It's more notable now than it ever was.TJD2 (talk) 03:56, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

TJD2 please stop acting immaturely it does not help anyone to get so bitey. RfCs are a war of attrition, so to put your full argument on the table is ill advised. I would wait until another merge vote come before further clarifying. Now that you have questioned me I will brake it down for you. This source here says the game is "An obituary to the epitome of horror", this source shows this teaser has won awards separate from the game. Sources provided Soetermans shows subject is clearly notable and passes GNG. In fact other sources have claimed this teaser itself is amongn the scariest of all time [1], and the first real horror game in years [2]. I hope you've learned something here. Please be advised. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 20:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Uhm... I don't think TJD2 was trying to be bitey. Why would they act immaturely if you're the second person that's actually against a merge? --Soetermans. T / C 07:33, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I think he is echoing your statement instead of questioning it, considering TJD2 is the person who created the P.T. (demo) page. AdrianGamer (talk) 10:49, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Not that there's a huge rush, but P.T. is still pretty much in the same state (not that I'm accusing anyone of being lazy, I easily could've added the sources myself of course) and so is Silent Hills. It does seem that merging is still the most popular way to go. --Soetermans. T / C 12:35, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Quick question from someone who hasn't paid much attention to these articles, but some attention to their subjects. Given we know next to nothing about what Silent Hills would have been like, and P.T. was what go everyone's attention, are we sure we're merging the right article here? --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 01:01, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I happened to stumble upon this. Which I might use for the article I am trying to expand. The reason why I am noting this is this sentence in the article: "Kojima has made it clear that “P.T.” and “Silent Hills” are not related. “P.T.” is a one-shot that allowed him to try to scare gamers in new ways while utilizing the Fox Engine. The idea to make it playable — “P.T.” stands for “Playable Teaser” — was born out of a desire to deliver the first-ever interactive teaser in lieu of the normal route of releasing a few pictures or videos." Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 01:05, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't want to sound pushy or anything, but I think that in the last two weeks since most opinions were given and votes were cast, a lot has been going on with Konami, Kojima and Silent Hills, with P.T. in the center of it. Del Toro also spoke of the cancellation, being surprised because P.T. was well-received and downloaded many times. With @Jhenderson777:'s new information – Kojima himself stating that Silent Hills and P.T. weren't related in a narrative sense – I think that a merge definitely isn't the way to go anymore. --Soetermans. T / C 09:31, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

AdrianGamer (talk · contribs), GamerPro64 (talk · contribs), The1337gamer (talk · contribs), TheDeviantPro (talk · contribs), Rapunzel-bellflower (talk · contribs). Can I still have your opinion on the merge after checking the article again. I still am not finished planning expanding. But I want you to update your opinions if you can after all the changes I have done. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 01:40, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jhenderson! First of all, wow! What a change. I can tell you've put in a lot of effort. (Although I would strongly, strongly, strongly suggest replacing the looping gif with a screenshot, as policy doesn't allow for gifs.) Yes, the P.T. article still has rough spots and parts to be added. However, I'm sold on it now, especially since they weren't narratively linked any way and that there is more material to discuss than what is in the Silent Hills article. So, I'm changing to don't merge. Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 03:30, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

• I'm gonna have to agree. I'll let it have its chance to be its own article. Swell work on the P.T article. GamerPro64 04:01, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Don't merge, looking at the articles currently, it seems to me there is a lot of reason to keep an article on P.T. itself. It seems even more notable than Silent Hills itself, seeing as that never came out and never got reviewed, awarded and analyzed. ~Mable (chat) 20:12, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

• Don't Merge, per Maple. Silent Hills is the less notable subject, and thus in fact should be merged to P.T. - 64.235.73.226 (talk) 23:42, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

• I suppose the article was in fact rewritten to some degree with the core remaining intact. I thanked you JHenderson on your talk page. I'm obviously still sticking with don't merge TJD2 (talk) 04:02, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

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.