Do we really need this "longplay" tag?

Question

From my understanding, we typically avoid meta tags. However, I saw this longplay tag get created, which is essentially just a type of playthrough and I'm not entirely sure it's necessary.

The current tag wiki describes a longplay as the following:

A Longplay is a documentative, non-competitive playthrough similar to a speedrun, where a game is played from start to finish in a timely manner. Unlike a speedrun, a longplay does not aim for the fastest route, but for the most thorough showcase of a game's content. This may include such things as extra cutscenes, unlockable content, Easter Eggs, game-over screens and more.

I fail to see how this would add to any question its added to. We have plenty of questions asking how to unlock easter eggs or alternate endings, which are not necessarily related to longplays. What would necessitate the use of this tag?

A potential counter-argument to this is that we have the speedrun tag. However, speedrunning strategies are very niche and specific to speedrunning and would not be encountered by the average gamer, thus a speedrun tag at least sort of makes sense.

I'm not convinced we need an extra tag that describes "unlocking all content" in games. Would the game's tag not suffice?

Answer 1

Expanding my comments & thoughts into an answer:

From the sounds of the discussions playing out here, I don't think we have anything against 'Longplaying' games. Longplaying is a form of gameplay after all, and we are a gaming Q&A resource, so questions which pertain to gameplay in the context of performing a Longplay (or otherwise) are on topic for us.*

How do we use tags?

Tags exist primarily to categorise content. Every community handles this differently, but I know of two main ways this is handled (on SE sites at least): 'Overarching' tagging and 'Specific' tagging

'Overarching' tagging uses larger-topic-area tags as a baseline, and applies more specific tags where they make the most sense. If this is how we worked on Arqade, it would look something like this:

• Sonic 2 -> platformersegagenesis sonic
• The Legend of Zelda -> nesrpgnintendozelda
• Playstation 4 -> playstationsonyconsole-gamingps4

This may make more sense on sites like StackOverflow - a question about C# 4.0 is still a question about C#, but it doesn't generally make much sense here as our 'topics' are generally smaller - someone who is playing Sonic 2 isn't suddenly an expert on Sega, or the Genesis, or even other Sonic games. So instead we typically stick to the smallest specific tags that can apply: individual tags based on what the question is actually about. 90% of the time this is a game or console title. For example:

• Sonic 2 -> sonic-the-hedgehog-2
• Legend of Zelda -> legend-of-zelda
• PlayStation 4 -> ps4

There are some exceptions of course where 'overarching' tags make sense for us:

• achievements exists for categorising questions about earning achievements (or trophies etc), (and for some people to add to their 'ignored' tags if they dislike them)
• terminology exists for questions about interpreting gamer-speak or sub-community lingo (see What is a "two-frame punish?" or Difference between tilted and triggered? as examples).

There are some others but these would be the ones most people are familiar with. These tags may span multiple games, communities or consoles, and are generally well received for the functionality and groupings they provide. Likewise, our larger topics can have sub-tags as well: minecraft-commands as the prime example, but also DLCs like skyrim-dawnguard.

So what about [Longplay]?

We've talked about overarching vs specific tagging, and some exceptions where the usefulness of the tag outweighs the awkwardness of applying overarching tags. So where does longplay lie?

1. Does it provide a useful 'overarching' grouping of like-minded content?

My answer is No - Like Vemonus states in the question:

We have plenty of questions asking how to unlock easter eggs or alternate endings, which are not necessarily related to longplays.

Questions about game functionality as they pertain to longplays are no different than just questions about game functionality. So the longplay tag shouldn't be used on questions about game strategies.

2. Is the only (current) question a valid use of the tag?

I would say Yes, it's certainly about Longplays in general, rather than something game-specific. Could the question exist without the tag? Probably, it could live under terminology as it is concerned with how the longplay community name/sort their playthroughs. But why would we remove it when it adequately describes the question?

3. Do we keep tags with only one question?

We do!. Due to the nature of games and their popularity, plenty of games/consoles etc may only have a few questions that are useful and valid.

4. Can [longplay] be useful as a 'specific' topic area?

The big question. Assuming the "Tag is for questions about Tag and Tag only" logic, can we use the tag for questions about Longplays in general? Can questions be asked about Longplay rules and regulations that don't pertain to a particular game?

I say Maybe. Not very committal I know, but I find it hard to pass judgement on a tag that has literally just been created.

I think we should monitor it's use (if any - see point #2 again) and act when we see a problem, rather than preemptively trying to shut it down based on what might happen.

To that end, I've added a Tag Wiki excerpt to the longplay tag which describes this:

a playthrough of a game for documenative or showcase reasons. Use this tag for questions regarding longplay formats, rules, or non-game specific conventions. For questions about a game in the context of performing a longplay, please use the game's tag instead.

Conclusion

I think the tag should stay, for now. It adequately categorises it's one question and hasn't posed a problem for us yet.

_{* Other rules still apply and close reasons like 'Too Broad' or 'Primarily Opinion Based' can be applied as needed on a question-by-question basis}

Answer 2

I agree. I don't think we really need this longplay tag.

According to the tag description, it's just a term for playthrough that aims for 100% completion. It specifically states it's a "non-competitive" playthrough, and that it "does not aim for the fastest route, but for the most thorough showcase of a game's content". From the longplays.org website, "a longplay is a play-through of a computer or video game, created with the intent of completing it as fully as possible, mainly for the purposes of nostalgia, preservation, and possibly as a walkthrough." To me, that sounds exactly like a normal playthrough, albeit with a little more focus on finding everything. Any question that can be asked about a normal playthrough of any game could also feasibly be asked for the longplay tag... which seems very redundant to me. It doesn't sound like doing a longplay playthrough changes the way you play in any significant manner, so why add a tag that only creates noise?

The only time I could see this tag being somewhat useful is, as Robotnik mentioned, when discussing the "rules" of longplay. However, I honestly can't think of any rules that would make sense in non-competitive scenario where the objective is literally to play the game normally.

Answer 3

While I understand the arguments presented above, I believe this should stay.

If I understood correctly, longplay is defined by

the most thorough showcase of a game's content

^Mage Xy's answer

However, isn't that what completionism is? Questions about pokemon strategies on how to find all pokemons in a region, questions about how to find all items in a Final Fantasy game, questions about unlocking all ships in FTL.

Essentially, while it does indeed overlap with normal gameplay, it isn't harmful and could be used as a synonim for Completionism, something that isn't needed to beat most games.