FYI, while building templates and updating articles, I've noticed that "some things in here don't react well to bullets" some bits of text don't fit a default model of "singular" article names with no initial article (A/An/The). To address that, I've made some initial changes to Template:ItemBox for "article" (no default) and "plural" (default = no) params. Haven't yet thought of a specific use for "article" (although I know I've seen some recently/in the past that could have benefited from same), but used "Stairs" as an example for the use of "plural". The "plural" param gets passed from the transcluded template to DIWvars, and in turn to Template:Plural that sets three separate vars, which then in turn get used in the affected template, depending on context.
Related, don't recall if I've mentioned it previously, but I've been trying to keep article names "singular" (unless excepted, e.g. "Stairs"), and category names "plural" (also unless excepted, e.g. singular franchise names such as "Aladdin").
Alright, sounds good to me. Admittedly little things like that was a concern I had with having pages built almost entirely using templates, but it looks like everything's under control. I never really realized how versatile they could be.
Aye. Some sites use them to help with translation to other languages, as you can build another version of a template to use a different language, and then any article that transcludes the template when that language is set gets the translated template - or at least that's how I understand it to work; haven't worked with anything like that myself.
My own preference is based on having hundreds (or thousands) of articles with a particular block of text, and if there's a desire/need to change it, no template = change 'em all by hand (or with a bot, for those that are familiar with them) - or just update a template and move on. ;-)
Going through 1.0 semi-methodically, put together Template:SpinBox for pages such as the Aladdin Townsperson Pack... and then the power went out, and just came back on; good stopping point for me tonight anyway.
Anyway, take a look when you have a chance. I figure there's not much to be said about them, other than what they're called and what they contain/unlock, but... see what you think. There's 109 such packs listed in the Collection covering all of the first page and the first 3+ columns of the second.
I noticed you added the 1.0 cat; I'd left that off as I didn't know if it would be overkill/redundant with the individual items themselves, given that these are just groups of toys and aren't otherwise presented that way in any other Edition. Thought that perhaps it was sufficient to "roll-up" to 1.0 e.g.
Disney Infinity 1.0
Toy Vault Spin Packs
Aladdin Townsperson Pack
Easy enough to modify the template to auto-add them to 1.0 if you think they should be there as well.
Yet another trail of breadcrumbs: started tracking which "Lucky Toys" were unlocked in the Disney Infinity Vault, only ones I've seen thus far displayed the item, name, and "A premium upgrade for the appearance of your Toy Box blocks.". Turns out these are the "Styles" (not labeled "Styles" at all in the 1.0 Toy Box Editor, but they are in 2.0/3.0) that can be applied to Basic Blocks - separate and distinct from "Skydomes" and "Texture Sets". Started taking cameraphone screenshots of them as I found them (don't currently have capture capability from XB360), but thought even the TBE-sized icons from 3.0 off the XB1X rendered at 4K would be cleaner, so... went into 3.0, hand-built a list of all of them, tagged them "3.0", went back to 2.0 and tagged any matches as such, then went back to 1.0 and tagged matches as such. Audit: 1.0 = 33, 2.0 = 51, 3.0 = 63, total = 147.
Out of curiosity, I checked the INterior "Themes" in 2.0/3.0, and found that 2.0 appears to have 24 floor/trim/wall themes and 3.0 has an additional 21 floor/trim/wall Themes (total of 45 each in 3.0, including the Disney Cruise Theme I don't have access to; tried to, but apparently the Oceaneering Band unlocks required a linked Disney account and DI server access, so... *fizzle*).
The Toy Box Styles don't appear to available in the 1.0 Collection or 2.0/3.0 Toy Store, so there's no other detailed description of them, associated costs, etc. The INterior Themes are, with generic descriptions of "Floors, walls, and accents" either "from" or "inspired by" (insert franchise name here). Also not sure how the Toy Box Styles are "acquired" in 2.0/3.0 other than they're already unlocked by default - could easily check that theory on my "test account" by deleting the account's data from the XB360, going into each game, and seeing what (if anything) is already there/unlocked. You don't want to know how many times I've already deleted that account's 1.0 data - and may yet do so again one or more times... X-D
So, to make a long story short (too late!), here's the question: would you think these would work better as (192? o_O) individual articles, or perhaps two articles named "Styles" and "Themes" (for Toy Box "Styles" and INterior "Themes") with a separate Gallery subpage per Edition to show what they look like?
It would probably be better to just have two articles for Styles and Themes in general plus the galleries, since unlike Texture Sets everything they change looks the same so it wouldn't be too hard to cover it all in one place. One thing about Styles though, along with Basic Blocks they can also be used on a lot of the Action Toys like the Masher and Pendulum. I don't think we really need to upload images of them using every single Style since at the end of the day it's the same texture being applied to a different model, but any toy that can be customized with a Style should have that be mentioned on their page somewhere.
On a similar note, I'm wondering about the rail customizations. I think (but I don't entirely remember) that they actually have unique customizations separate from both the Texture Sets and Styles. We may need a separate page for them too.
See the Theme Transformer article; just updated it with a gallery pic of an underground data center "seed" that I keep around for new Toy Boxes.
When choosing an action for the Theme Transformer, it initially lists five selections: each of those is associated with a unique set of "Styles", with World Theme sharing the list of available Texture Sets (whether internal or supplied by a disc) among Terrain, Population Clusters, and Tracks. So yes, Rail Slide Pieces have their own list/palette of "Styles". Interesting that they didn't name it the Style Transformer, as that's what they named what it's changing, lol.
The easiest one is Ledge Hang Pieces (which in 3.0 are in Platforming Toys, under both Unfiltered and Game Maker), as there's only three Styles. Seems like an opportunity there anyway for a Ledge Hang Pieces subcat of the Platforming Toys cat, eh? Hmmm... with only 16 of those items (if I'm counting them correctly and not missing any), wonder if I could place all 16 at once with enough separation to screenshot the entire set in each of the three Styles...
Edit: FYI, just checked in a new INterior, and... ta-da! ...the Theme Transformer *is* available under the Creativi-Toys group (just separate from the other "logic toys", almost as if it was added as an afterthought), and its actions include changing Walls, Trim, Floors, and Light Fixtures. Time to update the article... ;-)
Btw, modified Template:ItemBox and added styles/themes params; separately, so they could be described/linked differently. Potentially, that will also allow for a default to be set up for INterior Rooms such that they default to theme=yes, which I believe is most if not all of them. Also updated the Basic Blocks currently categorized as such, along with Masher and Pendulum.
If the pics look a little "too precise" - they are. ;-) I screenshot each from within the Toy Box Editor to ensure the elements would be in the same position on the screen, uploaded 'em all from the console to One Drive, which sync'd 'em down to the laptop, then opened each in Photoshop Elements, changed Canvas Size twice: first cropped centered to keep it even around all 4 sides, then again but anchored to the bottom of the image to trim the excess from the top. Saved each named after the style to a new folder with just those, uploaded via Special:MultiUpload. Opened a Finder window with the list, select all, copy, opened article, positioned cursor, paste, added Style names. Procedural. ;-)
Just followed a trail of breadcrumbs over to the Default Packs and Tools article and... I don't understand why this even exists. o_O
There are a number of things listed that are neither packs nor tools, but rather the characters default "abilities" when no other pack or tool has been equipped. Those that are actually linked anywhere seem to be either generic packs/tools available to all characters, or once in awhile a character-specific pack or tool (e.g. Flying Fedora) - and is otherwise incomplete with regard to anything listed that's actually an "ability". Things like Invisibility are just outright incorrect, as in that case it's Violet's "super power", and she doesn't require a "tool" to use it either in-game or in the movies. The game itself even differentiates between things like "Zero Point Energy" (one of Syndrome's default abilities) and the Zero Point Energy Gauntlet that can be used by other characters. The "Other Abilities" section seems to further prove the point, as none of those are packs or tools - nor are they even equipped/swapped with a pack or tool in 1.0 (although equipping a pack/tool may suppress the use of the ability, but that's just how the game engine works).
Seems the info would be better listed on each character's article in the "Abilities and Skills" section... and once that was done, the "Default..." article deleted/removed.
Oh... That's quite the mess. I think the idea there was that any ability activated by the buttons you'd normally press to use a pack or tool was considered to actually be a pack or tool regardless of how much sense it makes for them actually to be one of those. Moving the information to the actual character pages is definitely the way to go here.
Started reviewing the article to get an idea if there was a "model" the devs followed... and it seems to be that what's listed as "Pack" (which uses the Attack button, (Y) on Xbox) is effectively a Melee attack, and "Tool" (which uses the right trigger) is effectively a Ranged attack - with exceptions for Cars (Horn isn't much of an attack, unless you're a tractor, lol) and Dash (although it's splitting hairs whether him running down enemies from a distance at those speeds would be melee and/or ranged).
That being the case, Template:SkillsBlock that I started implementing on figure articles e.g. Mr. Incredible already has provision for their melee/combo attack and ranged attack (including their custom name for them, if any, e.g. Super Ground Smash). Seems that without any further modification to the template, just implementing that across all 29 DI 1.0 figure articles would spell the demise of the "Default Packs and Tools" article.
Sounds good. I wouldn't worry about the Cars characters too much since they control so differently. The Dash "attack" doesn't really seem like an actual attack to me, it's just their way of moving around that also happens to deal damage if you bowl something over (though if 1.0 acknowledges it as one, ignore that entire sentence, haha). Regardless I'd consider it melee since it doesn't do anything until they come into direct physical contact with the enemy/object.
FYI, was considering modifying Template:FigureBox to include line items for Costumes and Sidekicks for those characters that had one or both, somewhat making the figure articles a "one stop shop" for things like that associated with the character's in-game appearance.
Only catch is that it already has a "costume" param for the costume change power discs; was going to change that to "outfit" in order to add "costume" and "sidekick" params. As there aren't that many "outfits" in-game (<=20?), it wouldn't take that long to retrofit existing articles. Would also be easy enough to make it a 3-step change (2-step on the template side):
add "outfit" param to template, default to "costume" if not set
revise articles to use "outfit" instead of "costume", adding costume/sidekick params
revise template to not default "outfit" to "costume" anymore, and add costume/sidekick params as such
Yeah, I think option 2 would work the best. The visible section on the infobox should probably still call it "Costume Change" though, since I believe that's the official name of them (if not the closest thing we can call it without conflicting with the costumes).
Actually more a process than list of options, but gotcha. o7
Simple enough to make the infobox label whatever is most suitable. Seems when the game makes a reference at all it just uses "costume" (without capitalizing the c), and "Costume Change" describes what it actually does - changes their costume (or "appearance", but... yech, lol).
Edit: That being the case, think it would also be appropriate to use "Costume Change Discs" as the category for those; had started back in Jan setting them to "Costume Discs" as I'd done on DIW@Gamepedia, but in this context, would seem to make more sense to include the word "change" - and also, having both on a figure's page, avoids any ambiguity of a disc that provided a Costume NPC (which I don't believe there are any).
All "Costume Change Discs" are now in that category, total of 20: 18 as verified on the "Disney Infinity Round Power Discs" tab of the "Disney Infinity Collection" section of the 3.0 menu, plus "King Mickey" (which I don't have, and doesn't show up in that list, but *does* exist), plus "Baymax Costume Change", which was a "Digital Exclusive", so with servers and mobile shut down, no way to verify it one way or another. That also effectively completes that category for all Editions. \o/
Template:FigureBox updated as described earlier, and takes into account characters like Jasmine and Vanellope where their Sidekick has a different name (Princess Jasmine Sidekick and Vanellope Von Schweetz Sidekick, respectively); otherwise no value or "no" = no Sidekick, "yes" = standard Sidekick name (PAGENAME Sidekick).
Nice work. It seems like the Baymax costume change was never actually released at all, digital or otherwise, considering that besides the article saying it wasn't, we have no name, no image of the disc, and no images of it in use besides the original footage. We should probably recategorize it as scrapped assuming we can't find any evidence that it was ever released and just slipped through the cracks. Honestly the whole "digital exclusive" thing bothers me since it seemed completely arbitrary if a specific version of the game got bonus content just because, but I digress.
...properly implemented Template:SpoilerBlock. \o/ Only takes 2 parameters, no names, and is constructed of two smaller templates, in case there's a need at some point to enclose something a bit more complex than can (or should) be passed as template parameters. Initial usage on articles for Prebuilt Toy Box Worlds such as Basic Toy Box, in order to obscure the locations of the capsules that unlock them - in case there's any new (?) players that would prefer to find such things on their own.
I'd looked at the existing Template:Spoiler, but... o_O ...doesn't do much to prevent anyone from seeing the spoiler. Had thought of following up "what links here" to see about replacing it where it's used, but... that appears to be only on talk pages and such (not actual articles), so... probably not much point in doing so.
Nice work! Yeah, the original Spoiler template isn't used in the mainspace anymore because it was only used for information from films and other media that were relatively new at the time, but given that the series has been out of production for 4 years and now we're moving away from diving into the media the game's content is based on, it obviously hasn't been needed in that context for a while.
"...but how would that be different from any other day?" --Morpheus, Matrix Reloaded
Anyway,.. think we talked about it "a long time ago"... ;-) ...but in looking over all the linked articles in Template:Monsters University, it raises the question again. While the three physical figures technically originate from the first Monsters, Inc. movie, the rest of the in-game content appears to be solely based on the prequel, Monsters University. It may be splitting hairs (again, yet, still), but... thinking that in-game references should take priority. Thoughts?
I'd stick with Monsters, Inc., since that's the franchise as a whole and Monsters University is just one aspect of it. There's also actually more content from the original movie (though it's not apparent from the navbox since we never updated it), since the Toy Box Speedway track is based on it, and there's also Mike's New Car, from, well, the Mike's New Car short. (I'm personally not too keen on the Maleficent/Sleeping Beauty split we currently have either for similar reasons, although given in that case it's a remake/reboot/whatever and not a prequel set in the same continuity, it's an easier line to draw so I'm not too worried about it right now)
I look at Maleficent/Sleeping Beauty as easier to define, not so much based on the story, but on the visuals on which the in-game content is based in turn (not to mention the in-game description of the Maleficent character figure).
Monsters U/Inc,... ehhh... similar, but not quite. Obviously same/similar animation style for both, same studio, possibly same artists, etc.,... but for example none of the MU-specific content in-game appears anywhere in MI. Even the character adventures for 1.0 are based on MU. Taking Mike's New Car and the TBS track into consideration, I'm hard pressed to find significant MI content in any edition. Looking over what's already here, I can spot: Abominable Snowman (appeared in both), technically the Costumes for the figure, and singular Sulley Sidekick,... but I'm drawing a blank as to where to find any other MI content in-game. A generic view might be that the devs based everything on MU, and threw in a few MI items "just because they can".
That's true, but again Monsters University is still part of the Monsters, Inc. franchise as a whole. The best comparison I can think of is Finding Nemo/Finding Dory, where (even though our coverage of it is horrible) Finding Dory makes up the majority of the franchise's content in the games but we still organize it under Finding Nemo. Now, admittedly a big part of that is Finding Dory not existing at all when Finding Nemo content was added in the first game, so reorganizing everything under Finding Dory would've been a pain (and I think most of our userbase had jumped ship by that point due to the cancellation since we barely have any info on it).
Also, a Monsters University/Monsters, Inc. split might cause a bit of an organizational mess. Although pretty scarce, there is just general Monsters, Inc. content in the games, and categorizing it under Monsters University would be incorrect. Therefore, we'd need a Monsters University category and a Monsters, Inc. category (but not for the franchise itself, only the movie), rather than a general category for the entire Monsters, Inc. franchise. Though now there's an additional problem: Mike's New Car, which doesn't appear in either movie but only a short based on the original film. So now there needs to either be an entire category for Mike's New Car, which would only have a single article, or it's tacked onto the category for Monsters, Inc. the movie which isn't accurate. Then of course this opens up an even bigger can of worms with how we handle sequels and other subsequent media in general for consistency, which I'd really rather not deal with.
Hmmm... I suppose MU could be a subcat of MI; I'm otherwise out of ideas on this one.
Edit: Thought about this a bit more and... actually, that could work, given what you said about considering "the Monsters, Inc. franchise as a whole" - provided it's actually described that way on the wiki so as not to appear ambiguous. For example, a parent cat of MI with a description that reads something like:
"The Monsters, Inc. category represents the overall franchise from Pixar Animation Studios, including both movies (Monsters, Inc. and Monsters University) and the Pixar short "Mike's New Car"."
with the movies/short linked back to their corresponding articles at pixar.fandom.com, and an MU subcat with a description that reads something like:
"The Monsters University category lists specific in-game content associated with the corresponding Play Set from Disney Infinity 1.0."
I suppose, for that matter at that point, the figures could even be listed under the MI cat given that they appear in both movies, leaving the MU cat for content unique to the second movie/play set.
I suppose another way to look at it might be that there appears to be a "generalized model" of play set = franchise, but MI/MU being an exception to that model, revising the model to accommodate the exception - rather than excluding it.
Without going into detail, the same model vs exception approach might also be considered applicable to your Finding Nemo vs Finding Dory example.
Either I'm imagining things or I can't find the related discussion thread... in any case, while cleaning up Pleakley, had to give this some thought. He's not a "mission giver" per se, but from what I (vaguely?) seem to recall you mentioning previously, considering "Cast Member" as any character with any significant dialog/interaction (e.g. Edna Mode, but not the kid on the tricycle from the first The Incredibles movie). Does that seem about right?
Separately but related, do you think "mission givers" should have their own cat, or just be a note on their "cast member" article?
I'm actually not sure if Pleakley qualifies as a Cast Member. To further expand on what I said about them before and to be more consistent with how the game seems to define them, they should ideally originate from play sets only and be unlockable in the Toy Box. In Pleakley's case, I actually don't remember him physically appearing in gameplay at all and only being present in cutscenes.
Anyway, to avoid being sort of arbitrary in the future and clashing with what's presented in-game, it might be a better idea to trim it down only to the characters that are unlockable in the Toy Box and present under the Cast Member filter. With that settled, I do think a mission giver category would be beneficial since at this point not all mission givers are Cast Members.
Also, not sure what's going on with the Cast Members category but it seems to have categorized everyone except Black Cat under C for some reason.
Re: categorizing... found it - took awhile. :-P Miscoded a cat def in Template:NPCbox; was apparently trying to override visual display of cat name (which turns out not to be necessary anyway), but instead the syntax caused it to sort by the cat name - which also explains why moving Pleakley to "Mission Givers" then sorted him by "M". :-P Changed...
...and their went my inbox as the site re-categorized everything with that template. :-P Ah, well, at least it's correct now.
In 2.0 those all moved to other categories, and it instead includes only "basic blocks" and "blip blocks" - but no other types of toys.
In 3.0 the blocks moved to (separately) to "Basic Blocks" and "Active Blocks" under the "Simple Toys" Filter (and lumped under "Basic Blocks" when "Unfiltered"), and otherwise doesn't reference "Basic Toys" at all anymore.
So... I was thinking of perhaps Basic Toy cats qualified with Edition, as subcats to a general Basic Toys cat, that would also include the "Basic <type> Toys" cats representing the toys unlocked by the 1.0 Mastery Adventures, e.g.