Template talk:Need for Speed series

message: I don't think the division of the series on eras is done correctly. There is no reasoning behind the current order. 
The first era spans from 1994 to 2002 = 8 years
The second era 2003 - 2008 = 5 years
and the third era 2009 to 2011 = 3 years
And there was something revolutionary between The Run and Most Wanted that resulted in a new era of NFS games? How so? what?
Personally this list is awful. Not only does it not have any reason behind the way it's divided, but you've thrown in World, an MMO game which has nothing to do with the annual NFS games (the main-line releases), Nitro, which is not part of the main releases, and was released for Wii only. Why didn't you put the gameboy advance specific games here then too? or smartphone nfs games? This is just awful. And you have listed Shift 2 which even dropped the NFS name altogether, and is a mere branch, a digression off the main line of series. Each of these games were paired with main games in their respective years:
2009 - main game = SHIFT, side-release = Nitro
2010 - main game = Hot Pursuit, side-release = World
2011 - main game = The Run, side-release = Shift 2: Unleashed
I would personally add an MMO category, drop Nitro from the list, and move Shift 2 to spin-offs. Shift 2 to the NFS series is much like Age of Mythology is to the AOE series. It released on all the major systems as any other main-line game, but due to its content and as it shares the release year with The Run, it should count as a spin-off.
And drop the whole current era thing. Rivals BELONGS to the current era. if you want to consider 6 games an era, then you have a new era starting with this year, 2014's release. Shift->Rivals spans 6 games in the main line, and Underground->Undercover spans 6 games as well, and so does NFS I -> Hot Pursuit 2. 
I think it should be done like this. If no one responds soon, I'll change it to this. If you don't like it, revert the changes, but post some reasoning behind that.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.110.220.59 (talk) 19:23, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Era division 

message: Looking at the gradual removal of all the sub-sections in the template, I must ask: what was wrong with it? Now it's just one long chain of titles, and eventually someone's going to decide "Hey, this is confusing; we'll need to break them up again". --Scottie theNerd 03:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I know, and I agree with you. But you have to ask those who made the changes. --MrStalker 09:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template Sub-headers 

message: Why can't all NFS-related articles be in the same template as before? Is this some kind of new Wikipedia-guideline to remove all links to articles that some may find "unneccesary"?
"(no name + no release date + no playable demonstration = no substance)"
I say: Much intresting information about the development = very much substance. --MrStalker 09:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you. As long as the article exists and details about the next game are confirmed, there's no reason not to include it in the template. --Scottie theNerd 10:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that's what I mean. Same with the locations I think. --MrStalker 18:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

text: As I declared above: as long as the article exists, it should be in the template. If there's any argument over how much substance NFS XI has, put the article up for an AFD instead. --Scottie theNerd 01:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know, there is no active Wikipedia guidelines that exclude "less"-related articles from templates. So I say that we put locations back as well. --MrStalker 23:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future title + Locations 

message: Firstly, as I'm not sure why the template no longer features NFS-related articles, this isn't entirely directed at you.  However, as you're the one starting umbrella articles, many of them aren't even needed. You're simply creating articles with brief summaries and linking to their main articles. The locations have little in common, the characters have little in common, and I don't think the Soundtrack article will survive an AfD if it came to it. If we include the NFS-related articles (locations, characters, etc.) in this template, we wouldn't need redundant umbrella articles. --Scottie theNerd 12:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, don't kill the messenger. I agree in most of what you're saying, you got to ask A Man In Black.
Hm, there are two ways I see we can do this. One is to create a general article rather than an umbrella article. The other is to replace the umbrella articles with a specific template, such as seen with Template:Grand Theft Auto series and Template:Grand Theft Auto locations. --Scottie theNerd 06:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, it is not much to say generally about locations in the NFS series, so I think we go for the specific template. I'll get on it right away. --MrStalker 13:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I regretted not having a say in this, but would it be similarly effective if we used a category (i.e. :Category:Need for Speed locations) to list locations? A template is not very practical for so few links. ╫ ２５ ◀RingADing▶ 17:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: People rarely look in the categories. The template works well. --MrStalker 20:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not discouraging the use of the template, but it just doesn't appear necessary at the moment because there are only three articles, and :Category:Need for Speed locations is pretty much listing only these locales, with no long-term possibility that anything more specific will be added. A link to a category can do just about the same job as a template, but no actual coding is needed to list them, and is already available the moment the category is created. It's hardly logical to assume that people will not look into templates if a category link is available in the NFS series navbox, isn't it? ╫ ２５ ◀RingADing▶ 15:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see your point, but the template simply looks better and doesn't do any harm ;) MrStalker 18:50, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

text: The point is to provide quick and easy access, which the template does. If a template isn't practical with a few links, a category won't even survive the deletion process. --Scottie theNerd 04:38, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't argue with that. ╫ ２５ ◀RingADing▶ 15:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MrStalker: Your umbrella articles 

message: I reverted the most recent edit to the template which argued that Hot Pursuit 2 should have been in the Second Generation of NFS games as it was the first to appear on Sixth generation gaming consoles.
While Hot Pursuit 2 was indeed the first NFS to appear on the PS2 and Xbox, the change in generation was the splintering of the community and jarring transition from racing in untouchable Supercars (eg. Lamborghini, Ferrari, Lotus, Jaguar to name brands) on open highways (and rarely the odd deliberately unrealistic urban environment *cough*Empire City*cough*Atlantica*cough*) to driving in cheaply available and primarily Japanese vehicles in urban environments that do a good job representing real cities. Essentially, a switch to the Street Racing theme which dominated until Shift (though Undercover with the complete change in development paradigm is the first in the Third Generation, don't change it). Jdenm8 (talk) 13:43, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hot Pursuit 2 

message: I have edited the template to divide games into two basic categories: Main and secondary. Main games are games released on a consistent basis and usually had sequels/prequels. They all were released around November and are considered "big" games, as they were released to key systems at their time (PC/PS1 for Need for Speed I for instance, or PC/PS3/Xbox 360 for Most Wanted 2012, etc.). Secondary games feel more like spinoffs and don't follow the traditional norm: World is an MMO. Nitro was not released on any of the major consoles. Shift 2 was releaed in March while Run was being worked on for the normal November/September release. etc. You get the picture.
Also I've deleted the 4th generation altogether as the first two eras had 6 games per generation and Rivals will be the 5th game in current era (third era). Plus it is not "revolutional" as Underground was to Hot Pursuit 2 to call it a beginning of a new era.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.208.200.195 (talk) 16:09, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brushed out the wrong games 

message: Don't you think it should be moved to "Spin-offs"? I mean, it's not officially a part of NFS franchise. --Nicknine (talk) 21:14, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Motor City Online