Shinobi III: Return of the Ninja Master

From Sega Retro

I really think that the original version of a game, that was supposed to come out at around January of 1993 (according to one of the reviews) and even had some reviews out, should be considered as it's own thing, maybe even have it's own page. At least I feel that Computer & Video Games (UK) #135 and Mean Machines Sega (UK) #4 reviews don't really fit here. Foxysen1 (talk) 12:39, 23 May 2017 (CDT)

It's a good point, but I don't know if we should be making exceptions for journalists which fail to review finished products. Shinobi III may have been drastically re-worked, but it is still the same project and was only ever going to be released to the public once at the end of development. If a publication decides to print a review months in advance, we ought to be showing that, even if it adds an unfair bias.
Otherwise you'd have to decide when a game is finished enough for a review to be meaningful. Even today lots of publications review unfinished games - I'm not entirely against the idea of adding publication dates so people know when the review was printed, but I think the bad reviews need to be represented alongside the good ones. -Black Squirrel (talk) 16:08, 23 May 2017 (CDT)
Yea, was thinking of creating section for original version and move those two reviews there, somehow. This one just feels special for me due to how seemingly close it was to being released, due to these two reviews and rumor that Sega pulled game back upon recieving not good enough rating, with majority of levels being remade (judging by material we have) so I think of this one as "the lost episode". But right, game is done only when it's done, this wiki probably isn't focused on non-final stuff yet. Foxysen1 (talk) 19:42, 24 May 2017 (CDT)