Talk:Prima Games

Who owns the NSMB2 one? --Hiccup (talk) 15:36, 21 September 2014 (EDT)

Is Prima really all it's glory?
Now we all know that Prima is pretty good. But in a few places across this wiki I've seen some of you saying something like, "The Prima guide states this name, so that's official." But I want to say that Prima gets quite a few things wrong, like: The Mario Kart Wii guide says in several places that you can actually place Shells on the track so that they are stationary. If you just play the game a little bit you can find that this isn't true. The Super Mario Galaxy 2 guide doesn't even mention Amps, and calls the Scuttlebugs "Spoings" and "Spanglers", and the Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story guide doesn't say anything about Bowser X. Just saying. DarkBowser777 (talk) 21:22, 2 March 2017 (EST)
 * Prima guides are filled with errors, but they're licensed material. Prima can be wrong about the game mechanics of Mario Kart Wii but it can't be "wrong" about the names of Sir Domino or Heavy Para-Beetle when no other material give name for those things. Hence why it's usable (and mostly used) for sourcing names. That's my take on it at least. --Glowsquid (talk) 22:20, 2 March 2017 (EST)
 * I remember the MKWii guide saying Daisy is Peach's cousin or something as well...
 * While the Prima guides are official as of 2007, the games themselves should be the main source of information. If Prima says you can place stationary shells on the tracks, but the game doesn't allow that, the game mechanics take precedence and the Prima info is chalked down to trivia.
 * In terms of names, yeah, like Glowsquid said, if Prima's the only source, then we go with that. However, any Nintendo Power guides that say otherwise, we go with those instead. It's all in Naming. 22:55, 2 March 2017 (EST)
 * I question its credibility being considered as a reliable source for Naming in general. I have the most disdain for trusting it with King Bill (New Super Mario Bros. Wii) and its on-going proposal. The look of it looks like a Banzai Bill but has the abilities of a Bull's-Eye Bill. It doesn't even look like a King Bill. This case in particular makes me question Prima Games as a reliable source of information. However, for this discussion revival, I want to see how many inconsistencies can be spotted be logged here so that way we can discuss further if we should drop Prima as a reliable source for naming. Right now, its valid, but we need to gather evidence right now before we can decide if Prima should still be valid. -- 17:57, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
 * One thing to keep in mind is that even the games themselves get stuff wrong, like SSBWiiU saying you can get a point for K.O.ing Metal Face. You can't. Human error is a usual thing. 18:01, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
 * I think Prima Games has more human error than official sources. I can't prove it yet because I only have one piece of evidence. I need way much more. Not to mention it will be 2:1 if we count Ostro and Birdo in the Super Mario Bros. 2 manual. Another mention is the very controversial Rocky Wrench Koopa debate. Paper Mario Dizzy.png -- 18:05, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
 * If it's officially licensed, it's been approved by Nintendo, and I don't see a reason to doubt that. For every mishap within the Prima guides, there are also plenty of names for enemies and other subjects that would go completely nameless otherwise. It's not like the Nintendo Power guides are immune to mistakes either; for example, the guide for Luigi's Mansion says that there are no ghosts in the Observatory and calls the ghosts inside "Falling Stars". Prima gets this one right. Dismissing Prima entirely would do far more harm than good. 18:07, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
 * What I meant was, in terms like these, proper judgement should be used. To restate what I said a few months ago, what you do in the game may be completely different that what a guide says. The games, instruction manuals, Nintendo Power, Prima... Nothing's perfect. For naming, yes, them calling two different enemies by the same name is confusing, but if that's all we have to go off of... 18:10, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
 * Right now, let's just focus on how many errors we can spot and log. Can't conclude anything yet. -- 18:11, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
 * Why? Are you trying to score which guides have more errors tag the others? Never mind the fact that at this point, Prima has released plenty more guides than the now-discontinued Player's Guides, our naming policy already dictates that Prima takes lesser precedence to the NP guides. What do you want to change about that? 18:14, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
 * The goal is to distrust Prima, but right now, not enough evidence to support the claim that it is unreliable and action to discontinue it as a reliable source. It might not even be true. That's why I am requesting getting as much data on suspected errors as possible. This is going to take a long time. -- 18:17, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
 * As someone who owns and has read through plenty of guides from both groups, that's a pointless endeavor. Both of them are as prone to human error as everything else, and by the end of it, the amount of errors on both sides will be roughly equal to each other. And no, I am not going to go through each guide and count everything. I already have enough projects on my plate. 18:21, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
 * I'm not asking you specifically. Anyone that has Prima Guides. -- 18:23, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
 * Again, it's pointless, and I say this as someone who is plenty familiar with the guides - more so than you, if I may be so presumptuous. I'm reasonably sure that other people familiar with the guides would agree. 18:29, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
 * I see no reason to distrust them because they make mistakes. That'd be like ignoring the good faith aspect of this wiki. Perhaps there wasn't an actual official in-game name for somethings, like the King Bill for example, and they just made their best guess on it. That's not a mistake. Confusing, yes, but not a mistake. A mistake is something like the Green Shell example above, saying you can place them on tracks. Obviously, they didn't do research on that one. 18:22, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
 * Per Alex and Time Turner. -- 18:23, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
 * Per Alex, Turner, and Chomp. Human error occurring every now and again doesn't mean they are immediately and irrevocably untrustworthy on every single subject that has nothing to corroborate it. And still, I've seen worse errors on this very site, for instance the "Other Appearances" section of the Thwomp article was outright wrong to the point that it was pretty clear someone had just made some things up, and remained like that for years until I finally fixed it. Not to mention official sites, for instance the official Wario Land 3 website calls Octohon a "squid" and Mad Scienstein friendly. And also implies that Tadpole looks like Elmo. 17:39, 23 August 2017 (CT)
 * I think the best action to take is to just use your judgment. If an error is the only available source for the name, we should list it, because people will definitely search that here. If there is a correct name that Prima misnamed, it should mentioned in the article and redirected to it. Ultimately, I also say we should keep Prima as a source, as it's still an officially licensed one. 20:02, 23 August 2017 (EDT)