Wikipedia has had to lock down the Silent Hill 2 Remake page after repeated vandalism from editors who refuse to accept that the remake of Konami’s seminal horror game released to critical acclaim earlier this week.

Outright lies around the games reception and metacritic score - including one edit that said the game had “received the worst reviews imaginable” - means the page has now been put into a semi-protected state to stop unregistered users from making wild, unsubstantiated claims, including one that said Eurogamer had awarded it 0/5 stars when, in fact, it got top marks.

It’s unclear what’s motivating the edits, although its presumed by some to have been fuelled by the nauseating discourse that the game is “woke” because of changes made to the characters facial features and clothing.

Alternatively, it may stem from some fans’ dismayed that Silent Hill 2 has been remade by Bloober Teamor, indeed, at all.

  • ekZepp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    People should really stop doing that kind of bullshit. If you didn’t like the remake post your opinion somewhere, but trying to falsify others scores is a douche move.

    • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      The people doing this kind of bullshit are either children or fascists. They aren’t interested in “healthy debate” with you. They are lashing out at the Great Woke Bogeyman.

      Honestly we should be relieved that the time these brainrotted fascists spend vandalizing Wikipedia isn’t spent sending rape or death threats to the developers, which is usually how these witch-hunts on “woke” go.

  • 9point6@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    2 months ago

    Of course it’s forever-toddlers throwing a tantrum about “woke” again.

    God forbid the vast majority of normal people don’t agree with whatever pathetic rationalisation they have ended up with in their gullible little minds.

  • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Point of clarification: the article was semi-protected, and “locked” is an oversimplistic description of it (understandable, since a lot of people who report on Wikipedia don’t really understand how it works). Technically there’s a way to lock a page such that only the Wikimedia Foundation staff can edit it, but realistically, full protection (i.e. only administrators and those above them can edit it) is probably the closest thing to a proper “lock” that ever gets used.

    Semi-protection (the grey lock with a little person in it) just means that you need to be autoconfirmed (technically confirmed works too, but that system is basically disused). If you’re autoconfirmed, that means you’ve made at least 10 edits on Wikipedia and your account is at least 4 days old – an extremely low bar to clear that largely keeps out spam from IP addresses and sockpuppet accounts. The semi-protection on this article is set to expire in three days.

    There’s also extended protection (the blue lock with an ‘E’ on it) that you’ll generally see on highly contentious topics such as ultra-high-profile political figures, enormously contentious disputes between nations (Russia–Ukraine, Israel–Palestine, and India–Pakistan, to name a few), and then some miscellaneous ones like ‘Atlantic Records’ and ‘Whopper’ (the latter was because Burger King launched an ad which is designed to trigger your Android device to read out the first part of the Wikipedia article, making it red meat for vandals). This requires an account to have at least 500 edits and be at least 30 days old.

  • 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Why? The original didn’t go anywhere, and they’re just screwing us out of possible remakes my faking bad press. So far, I’ve heard that they knocked it out of the park and I hope it’s true. Give me my SH4 remake

  • GeneralEmergency@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 month ago

    Gmers being Gmers

    I bet none of the little shits even played the original. They probably think Pyramid Head was just the town’s old executioner. And not the personification of James guilt over his unhealthy view of women.

  • B312@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I get why some people are mad at the facial changes, I personally think it’s unnecessary, but if the game is good who cares. But making up false reviews to bring down a game just because you disagreed with how they handled something is crazy.

  • Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t know what it is, with this need to shit on every single movie or game before it even comes out. There are people who cheer for this stuff to fail, it’s absurd . It goes hand in hand with this other issue, when a game is released people will either love it or be called “unplayable shit”. Nobody has an in between anymore. Just cause some games aren’t a 10/10 masterpiece, it doesn’t mean they’re shit.