Template talk:TrophyTableRow

Discuss.

I implemented this over here. I think it works pretty good. Any objections? Toomai Glittershine The Superlative 18:25, 6 October 2014 (EDT)

I like it. It makes things simpler and easier to do than what we do now with the trophy descriptions. I'd add it on all the trophy pages if I wanted to. Rtzxy Smashing! 18:28, 6 October 2014 (EDT)

Usage

Why exactly are the trophy tables in some pages being merged regardless of version? I think a Both, 3DS only, Wii U only setup would be vastly preferable, more like here. Miles (talk) 20:30, 3 December 2014 (EST)

I think having three sections is clunky and makes it more difficult to find a particular trophy. A single list seems simpler overall; I'm not sure what advantages there are to keeping them split. Toomai Glittershine The Eggster 21:18, 3 December 2014 (EST)

I strongly disagree. It was easier when the trophies were sorted by version. Also alphabetically really isn't the way to go here I don't think, I preferred it when Duck Hunt was on top even though Clay Pigeon is higher alphabetically. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 21:25, 3 December 2014 (EST)

The advantages are clearer delineation between what trophies are available in which version without having to re-sort the table multiple times, and there's not really any loss in terms of navigability by keeping the tables split since people can always Ctrl-F (or equivalent). Miles (talk) 22:11, 3 December 2014 (EST)

I prefer the separate lists as well. It seems really weird to list them in a different order than they appear in-game. Tepig (talk) 21:42, 3 December 2014 (EST)

See this is my thought process with the issue:

1. We can't have two lists. Since all trophies I know of have the same description between games, there'd be tons of duplication.
2. We can't have three lists. It wouldn't be possible for someone to quickly get a list of "all the Wii U trophies", because they're split across non-consecutive sections.
3. Therefore, we should have one list.

I suspect we could re-sort to in-game ordering without too much of a problem, unless there's a sorting difference for the same trophies between the two games. Toomai Glittershine The Brass 22:43, 3 December 2014 (EST)

Also, I don't see how re-sorting a single table is a problem; on the contrary, I think it's a very clean way to have one solution for multiple use cases. Toomai Glittershine The Bold 23:07, 3 December 2014 (EST)

"We can't have three lists. It wouldn't be possible for someone to quickly get a list of "all the Wii U trophies", because they're split across non-consecutive sections."

That is quite easily accomplished by simply reading two sections, the "both" and "Wii U-only" sections. How is that a problem? It's much more intuitive than having to filter out rows of a combined table, even a sortable one (especially given you're seemingly advocating not sorting it that way by default). Miles (talk) 23:40, 3 December 2014 (EST)

I strongly suspect that the average player does not care whether a trophy is in both versions or not, but rather cares about having a list they can glance at to determine which trophies they are missing in a single game. With three lists, such a person will have to continuously flip back and forth between the top and middle/bottom of the page (or the in-game trophy list).

Given the above, in-game sort would be much better than alphabetical sort. Toomai Glittershine El Pollo 01:04, 4 December 2014 (EST)

It looks much neater how it is on pages like this one. I've never liked alphabetical sorting with this sort of thing, and it's more natural to click on the ToC to see the 3DS exclusive trophies then to click on that arrow. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 11:14, 6 December 2014 (EST)