Talk:Tetris#rfc 46F74AF

Recently the original creation date listed in the article was changed from 1984 to the much more likely 1985. While I believe that this was a correct change, I also think that the controversy over the creation date should be mentioned in the article, perhaps even in its own subheading. The company that owns the game[https://tetris.com/about-us] and several high profile sources[https://www.cnn.com/style/article/tetris-video-game-history/index.html][https://www.businessinsider.com/tetris-history-2014-6] claiming a different creation date than the one listed in the article is significant and notable, and should be mentioned in the article. Leaflemon (talk) 03:35, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

:I can't disagree with your thoughts on the matter. If you want to try to hash up a paragraph here to describe the situation feel free. I'll gladly take a look. oknazevad (talk) 03:51, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

:Yes, that seems like a good idea. I'm the one who changed it from 84 to 85. The only reason I didn't add a paragraph in the article is because there's no real easy way to source it, and the leading theory for the reason TTC gives an incorrect date (while almost certainly true) is speculative. Explodingcreepsr (talk) 07:12, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

::The official Tetris website lists the launch date as 1984: https://tetris.com/history-of-tetris GraemeCod (talk) 08:04, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

:::And that claim is what is disputed. Please familiarize yourself with the sources already included before reposting them. oknazevad (talk) 08:34, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

::::I am simply responding to what has been said above: the dispute can be referenced, with the original founder and now owner of the rights to Tetris claiming the game was designed in 1984 (and first played on 6 June 1984 to be precise) - and then link to his website to show this claim; whereas public and commercial references to the development of game indicate a 1985 launch date. GraemeCod (talk) 09:44, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

:::::If the 1985 creation date is to be challenged, I would suggest only sources that predate 2009 are valid - these would predate the year the Tetris Company changed their minds. —Flicky1984 (talk) 08:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

::::::I'm strongly against any sort of statement that we pick and choose which sources from what year are valid on this without some source backing the unreliability of them. This sounds like WP:OR. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:00, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

::: Numerous sources giving a vague year as a release often just refer to a copyright date and aren't really historically in-depth research. I don't even see anything about the Russian version of Tetris being released commercially, as I think the idea of even selling something like that within Russia is a bit of an idea that didn't exist at the time. Andrzejbanas (talk) 05:04, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

::::Your summary of the situation is inaccurate. Numerous sources from before 2009 give the same year of creation, nothing vague about it. This including the original Tetris US trademark/copyright filing. —Flicky1984 (talk) 00:20, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

:::::That's the issue. The US release is a lot more traceable, but we'll have to try and find something specific for its "release" if it had such a thing in the Soviet Union. That said, we go by the earliest known public release for media, not for a copyright or a in-development model. Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:59, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

There is a BBC documentary about Tetris called Tetris: From Russia with Love (2004). In the documentary, the following bits are stated:

• Around 5:40, the narrator states the first colour version of Tetris was developed in the summer of 1985, and it was the version that Pajitnov lent to friend outside the computer center, and in turn, copied it to their friends. I don't believe the Elektronika 60 is even capable of producing colour. If I had to guess what this 1984 year comes from, its from the original version Pajitnov was working on. More research will have to go into the distribution of Tetris across the Soviet Union as its not uncommon that old computer games are transferred this way, but we should clarify this in prose with sources. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:13, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

:The leading theory for the 1984 date within the Tetris playing community is that Blue Planet Software (Which is now merged with TTC but was at the time the licensing company for Tetris) was facing a pretty bad decline, and [https://www.prweek.com/article/1266908/tetris-reaches-record-awareness-level-marks-25th-anniversary hired a PR company called Graylink] to try and get it back on the upswing. They wanted to do a 25th anniversary thing for E3 that year and just sorta fudged the numbers a bit for it to happen that year, which is why you will only find sources after 2009 citing the June 1984 date. [https://bospar.com/case-study/long-live-tetris/ The campaign was very successful], for what it's worth. Explodingcreepsr (talk) 18:12, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

::I mean, all totally fair, if not potentially against WP:OR. Regardless, we don't have much content related to any sort of public release to the game, and I'm not sure Pajitnov passing it back and forth between co-workers and friends and such is really an official release. And if it is, that's probably going to become more traceable at some point or we just haven't dug out any really specific details on this. Regardless, currently the article states it was released in 1985 for the said computer above, which appears to be false. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:51, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

:::I think there a several aspects that would benefit from clearer delineation and discussion:

:::1. the date of the first version (originally 1985, as sourced on Wikipedia prior to 2009; later 1984, stemming from the one source: E3 2009),

:::2. the date of the first release (1988; naturally, outside of Russia),

:::3. whether or not Tetris Company changed the date.

:::If Wiki lists public release for media would that mean it should be listed as 1988? Assuming we can find an applicable source in the pre-internet age, and no other Russian release comes to light. Then the rest of this mess can be clarified as well as possible, with sources old and new, in the body text. Not WP:OR but I do know the when Vadim first started at the Computer Centre, September 1984, Tetris did not yet exist. —Flicky1984 (talk) 23:37, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

::::Good input! That said, video game release dates are often repeated, errenously and furhter information comes out of the wood work. Just like how we can't even confirm US release dates for games as popular as Super Mario Bros.. I've spent the afternoon digging up some content we can try to apply to consider information.

::::*Crookes in Retro Gamer (2018):

::::**"To go into the ins and outs of what happened between 1984 and 1989 would likely take over the entirety of this issue...the breakthrough was a PC version in 1985, created by Alexey with the help of colleague Dimitry Pavlovsky and a young programmer called Vadim Gerasimov."{{cite magazine|magazine=Retro Gamer|title=The History of Tetris|last=Crookes|first=David|year=2018|issue=183|p=21}}

::::**"From there, the game found its way out of the USSR. It was ported to the Apple II and Commodore 64 by Hungarian coders then, in 1987, it was converted to many machines for the North American and European markets. The following year, Bullet-Proof Sofware's boss Henk Rogers spotted the game at the consumer Electronic Show in Las Vegas and became determined to secure the rights."{{cite magazine|magazine=Retro Gamer|title=The History of Tetris|last=Crookes|first=David|year=2018|issue=183|p=21}}

::::*"Grannell in Retro Gamer (2007):

::::**"Released: 1985"{{cite magazine|magazine=Retro Gamer|title=The Making of...Tetris|last=Grannell|first=David|year=2007|issue=42|p=43}}

::::**The Tetris on Alexey's [Elektronika 60] at this point was, by his admission, something of a prototype. However, all of the game's important mechanics were there, and the game had been surprisingly easy to create. "I give you such details about the game, but all the decision were done in one day in a couple of hours," claims Alexy. "in reality, somehow, all these decisions were made so naturally."{{cite magazine|magazine=Retro Gamer|title=The Making of...Tetris|last=Grannell|first=David|year=2007|issue=42|p=47}}

::::*"Hitting Reset: Devising a New Video Game Copyright Regime" (2016)

::::** "Created in 1984, ''Tetris has become one of the best knonw games, and has since been released on myriad platforms, including smartphones."{{cite journal|journal=University of Pennsylvania Law Review|volume=164|date=April 2016|issue=5|last=Dean|first=Drew S.|p=1264}}

::::* "How to Lose at Tetris" (1997)

::::** "[Tetris is] designed by Soviet mathematician Alexey Pazhitnov in the late eighties and imported to the United States by Spectrum Holobye, Tetris won a record number of software awards in 1989."{{cite journal|journal=The Mathematical Gazette|volume=81|issue=491|date=July 1997|last=Burgiel|first=Heidi}}

::::* "Soviet Invents Intriguing Game" (1988)

::::** "Tetris was invented in the Soviet Union by Alexi Pasnitv, a 30-year-old researcher at the Computer Centre (Academy Soft) of the U.S.S.R. Academy of Scientists in Moscow. The program was originally written by Vadim Gerasomiv, an 18 year-old studen at Moscow University. [...]Tetris is a Join product of Academy Soft in Moscow, Andromeda Software ltd. in London and Spectrum Holobyte in California." {{cite news|newspaper=The Berkshire Eagle|date=May 1, 1988|page=D4|last=Papkin|first=Allan S.|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-berkshire-eagle-sovietinventsintri/30933996/|accessdate=October 4, 2024}}

::::* "Glasnost Reaches Computer Games, and Tetris is Terrific"

::::** "As the opening screens of Tetris announce, the game was designed by Alexi Paszitnov, 30, of the USSR Academy of Scientists (also known as Academy Soft). It was originally programmed by Vagim Gerasimov, an 18-year-old student at Moscow University. What the screens don't tell you is the circuitous route the game took to become the first piece of Russian software to be sold in America. Victor Brjabrin, head of Academy Soft, sent a copy of the game to a company in Budapest, which in turn passed it on to a London agent, who licensed the game to Spectrum Holobyte, an American software company based in Alameda, California. Spectrum Holobyte has an International Series of software and publishes titles from Asia and Europe, such as Soko-Ban from Japan and Zig Zag from the United Kingom. The original version of Tetris ent over from Russia had crude animation and graphics, but Specturm Holobyte executives spotted its potential. They retained the general premise of the Russian version by ASmericanized it by speeding up the action and spicing up the graphics, offering sensational displays of sights as Gorky Park, Red Square and the Soyuz spacecraft."{{cite news|newspaper=Chicago Tribune|date=June 10, 1988|page=76|last=Lynch|first=Dennis|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/chicago-tribune-glasnostreachescompute/21063440/|accessdate=November 4, 2024}}

::::* "Eastern Bloc Nations start to join Microcomputer Revolution"

::::** "According to officials of Spectrum Holobyte, the American distributor, Tetris was written on an International Business Machines Corp. PC by programmers at the Computer Centre of the USSR Academy of Sciences in Moscow. [...] Whether the young programmers of Tetris, identified as Vagim Gerasimov, an 18-year-old computer student at Moscow University, and Alexi Paszitnov, a 30-year-old researcher at the Academy of Sciences will follow their American counterparts to great wealth remains to be seen. Robert Stein, the British entrepreneur who brought the program to the attention of Western computer companies last year, said he plans to visit the Soviet Union soon to see whether there are other programs that might catch the fancy of the Western world. [...] Stein, head of the company called Andromedia Software Ltd., discovered Tetris during a visit to a Hungarian company that develops software for Western computer companies."{{cite news|newspaper=The Montreal Gazette|date=February 11, 1988|page=80|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-gazette-easternblocnationsstartt/21063463/|accessdate=November 4, 2024}}

::::* From The Tetris Effect: The Game that Hypnotized the World (2016)

::::** "Tetris had a stunning global impact. In 1984, a lone computer scientist at the Russian Academy of Sciences, working in his off hours on painfully oudated equipment programmed it." (page 6)

::::** "Pajitnov has programmed his game on his Electronica 60 computer. Tying the game to this very idiosyncratic computer, itself a knockoff of any already outdated Western computer, made it very hard to share Tetris. Few people, even at the RAS had an Electronica 60, and certainly no one purchasing a computer for the first time would choose this machine or platform." (page 61)

::::** "Even if you were lucky enough to be on of a handful of Muscovites with access to a personal computer at work or at home, and you had somehow managed to get a hand on a copy of Alexey Pajitnov's code for Tetris, it would likely have done you no good. The Electronica 60 was a rare machine, even at the RAS, and the original 27-kilobyte file was written to work on that specific computer. It wasn't compatible with the IBM PC machines that were starting to become the de facto standard for computing both in Russia and the West. Alexey's code for Tetris simply wouldn't run on the computers most Russian programmers and technology enthusiasts had access to." (p 36)

::::** "The IBM version had been coded from scratch and was vastly superior in every way. It looked better, played better, kept score like a standard video game."

::::* Game Developer (2010)

::::** "Alexey Pajitnov is, of course, the creator of Tetris -- a game he originally developed while working at the Academy of Sciences in Moscow in 1985. Of course, during the late '80s the game's popularity exploded internationally." [https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/alexey-pajitnov---i-tetris-i-past-present-future here]

::::So from this, even in the past, there is a lot of contradicting information, either from sources making assumptions, or other bits. The potential details are that Pajitnov made Tetris really quickly and all his choices for it were made lickity split for his Elektronika 60. While in the early Retro Gamer game, he says Tetris was everywhere and the 2006 Retro Gamer article suggests that tons of Elektronika 60's had it, later, an entire book dedicated to Tetris, suggests otherwise that it was more likely the DOS version that spread, as the Elektronika 60 was a very oudated computer and it was very hard to just "transfer" Tetris, even if you had the code somehow. He also only got Vadim on board later for an IBM PC compatible version which added several features from his own game, including colour, so that balances out with the BBC documentary that it was the colour version that spread, not the Elektronika version. Despite this, I do not have full access to that Tetris book (christmas is around the corner), but may investigate further to see if it has any details on when that was made as even if it's not a release date, it can help give the user and understanding of when at least some people were playing a version of Tetris. Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:12, 5 November 2024 (UTC) Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:12, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

:::::The Elekronika 60 version was just a prototype, and supposedly he worked with Vadim immediately after it was created, [https://web.archive.org/web/20090602215312/http://vadim.oversigma.com/Tetris.htm to port it to an IBM PC], and the first MS DOS version was done mere days after the Elektronica version. The link I sent, from Vadim's website, also says it was worked on from 1985-86. I had to use an archive of it though, because the day after E3 2009, the website was changed to say [https://web.archive.org/web/20090618093133/http://vadim.oversigma.com:80/Tetris.htm 1984]-86, with no other changes. Explodingcreepsr (talk) 07:43, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

::::::I read this a while ago, but had forgotten the details. This would explain why Tetris: From Russia with Love talks about the first color version being developed and distributed. Supposedly the Elektronica version and the color MS DOS version were developed a few days apart, and the MS DOS version was the one that was distributed, not the Elektronika version like Retro Gamer claims. Explodingcreepsr (talk) 07:48, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

::::::I think we'll need to take a look at the The Tetris Effect book to be sure as it goes into the most details about the development of the game than any previous source I mentioned. As for Gerasimov, he does say he developed his version shortly after, but it looks like the initial MS-DOS version went through several drafts, as he states "{{gt|In fact, I still enjoy programming in the descendant of Turbo Pascal - Borland Delphi. The last version of Tetris, we worked on together, was compiled with Turbo Pascal 4. That last version of the game had number 3.12. Although 3.12 is pretty much an arbitrary number as we did not have a strict versioning policy.}}"

::::::That said, I also have this article in The Guardian with Pajitnov saying "{{gt|In June 1984, it occurred to me that they might be a good basis for a computer game.}}" [https://web.archive.org/web/20140603040236/http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/jun/02/how-we-made-tetris here]." While this doesn't indicate that he started coding or completing the code, as he has said, he made similar Tetris-like games that did not really pan out, it at least gives us a bit of a timeframe of when he may have started fiddling with the idea. I have no idea what specifically The Tetris Company wants to do with an anniversary, or what the anniversary is celebrating (as Tetris has a very convoluted release history and with their connection with Pajitnov, it seems like they are linking the 1984 period to not really a release, but the earliest development of it. Strange, but hardly impossible. As for Gerasimov's write-up, he could have easily realized he was wrong about the date, or mistyped it, and changed it. That said, your theory about the 25th anniversary of the game could have somehow put pressure on him or something/anything to change it. That said, we have no proof of either and we can't just assume some conspiracy is happening regarding the dates without some sort of proof. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:19, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

:::::::The book seems like an interesting lead. I also don't think Gerasimov mistyped or realized he was wrong, because in 2018 someone [https://pastebin.com/HrQzZicx emailed him about it] and he said he believed it was 1985, and was puzzled by the anniversary being in 2009. It's probably still possible to email him and clarify further. Explodingcreepsr (talk) 20:54, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

::::::::I mean, we could, but this isn't really following policy specifically WP:STICKTOTHESOURCE. Regardless, unless these guys are keeping their own diaries, he has no concrete data outside he belives it was 1985 too. I think I'll look into the book to hope to find more. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:03, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::It was my understanding that Vadim changed his website on request of Pajitnov/Tetris Co. The issue with the Tetris Effect book, for me, is that it was made after 2009 and so uses the revised timeline. Same with the article/interview in The Guardian, etc. I'm wary of this as I've previously mentioned, it feels too much like rewriting history. About the new timeline Henk said to Nintendo Life, and I'm paraphrasing, "well that's what Alexey said" which feels no better or worse than a date from the hand of Vadim. With each source it's almost as if we need to figure out are they referencing the E3 2009 revised timeline or the one that existed for ~20 years before that. I'm up with helping add to a spreadsheet of source data, if one is created/owned by somebody else. As whatever date is settled on should be supported by a variety of sources, and at this point we've got ~20 years of mostly printed sources that said 1985 and ~15 years of mostly online sources that say 1984, my hunch is that 2009 will be a quite obvious split date. Another thing I've just remembered is that there are timestamps on the original versions that have been preserved. I can't remember if it's the IBM PC version or Electronika 60 version, sorry. There's also likely to be supporting material in the forthcoming Tetris game compilation. The earliest Tetris book I have is a Japanese one from 1989 (pre-Game Boy version) but it doesn't list the creation/release date of the original. Even in year one outside of Russia, Tetris epoch, the creation date was mysterious. There's also a Russian book from 1987 about the Computer Center that mentions Tetris in passing, but sadly no date. —Flicky1984 (talk) 01:11, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::::Oof. Yeah, as said the release date of this material is down to just what the creators memories. I doubt we'll have an earliest release date, but we can at least go by what the developers state and note when they have given different answers to tell readers that generally, there have been contradictions. I've done similar things for the article on "Planet Rock where I couldn't confirm what a specific date was. I felt comfortable throwing away the ones that were just flat out off by other historical timelines that made sense with news articles of the day. If anything, the uncertainty might make someone closer to materials to confirm the details in some sort of publishable form. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:02, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::::Thanks for the recent changes. I found an interview from 1989-08 where the conception date is mentioned as 1984. I'm not sure I've added the sfn correctly, #17 at the time of writing, but I did manage to add the magazine in the bibliography. —Flicky1984 (talk) 15:52, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::::Recent interview talking about 1984 prototype, which didn't have the concept of a Tetris (clear four lines) https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-aias-game-makers-notebook/id1313004515?i=1000692874362 —Flicky1984 (talk) 10:09, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::::::That's interesting. I'll have to listen to it later. I do know that on Vadim's website, he says that Pajitnov had made a sort of tetris like game called "Genetic engineering" a few years prior.

::::::::::::::"A few months after we started working together, Pajitnov came up with the Tetris idea. Before we met he had a computer game called Genetic Engineering. In that game the player had to move the 4-square pieces (tetramino) around the screen using cursor keys. The player could assemble various shapes. I don't remember the exact objective of that game, but it seemed rather dull"

::::::::::::::Could that be what he was talking about? According to Vadim, the Electronica 60 and IBM PC versions were made very shortly after his idea of tetraminoes falling into a glass, and those versions already had the idea of a 4 line Tetris Explodingcreepsr (talk) 21:47, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

I'm surprised no one has mentioned this already in the discussion, but right as this started gaining steam, [https://www.timeextension.com/news/2024/06/anniversary-is-tetris-really-40-this-year Time Extension] posted an article on the release date confusion. Based on their investigation, which included reaching out to Henk Rogers himself, they concluded that Tetris was released on 1985. Lazman321 (talk) 01:24, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

::Yes I just noticed this was added to the article. I was going to follow-up now that I've played Tetris Forever. That being said, how do we organize this in the infobox and the article? Per Tetris Forever, the 1985 MS-DOS versions of Tetris did not really have a commercial release. They were only circulated via floppy discs by people passing them around. The first commercial release of Tetris was the MS-DOS version appears to be the version released in the US. As the infobox uses the first date as a "year", is this a official release if its just being passed around? Probably something to clarify in the release section and have the infobox follow in suit pre MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:05, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

{{reftalk}}

The previous GA review was not done properly, nor closed properly. I have moved it to Talk:Tetris/GAarchive so that a new GA review can proceed. -- asilvering (talk) 04:49, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

{{Talk:Tetris/GA1}}

During this article's GAN review, the definition for this article was brought into question. The reviewer, 3df requested that Tetris be defined in the article as a franchise rather than a video game; I subsequently redefined it as a series of video games. However, oknazevad came into the review challenging this definition, saying that Tetris is not a series of video games or franchise, but rather an individual video game, which put both me and 3df on the fence.

The complication is that there are multiple Tetris games that widely differ from each other, with old examples such as Tetris 2 + Bombliss and Tetrisphere and new examples such as Puyo Puyo Tetris and Tetris Effect having completely different mechanics and game modes and yet all being covered here. However, sources seem to universally cover Tetris as it is an individual game. Searching "Tetris" on WP:VG/SE and looking at the three pages that will load, [https://www.wired.com/story/tetris-helps-stress-anxiety/ Wired], [https://www.nintendoworldreport.com/review/69044/tetris-forever-switch-review Nintendo World Report], [https://time.com/6266810/tetris-movie-apple-tv-true-story/ Time], [https://www.vice.com/en/article/the-man-who-made-tetris/ Vice], [https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/31/movies/tetris-game-boy-nintendo.html The New York Times], [https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2024/01/03/willis-gibson-tetris-winner/72098422007/ USA Today], [https://www.pcgamer.com/games/the-original-tetris-was-a-survival-game-the-man-who-prised-tetris-out-of-the-soviet-system-recalls-how-different-it-once-was/ PC Gamer], [https://www.polygon.com/guides/2019/2/22/18225349/tetris-strategy-tips-how-to-jonas-neubauer Polygon], and [https://www.ign.com/articles/2004/09/08/arcade-legends-tetris-2 IGN] refer to Tetris as a single game, even when talking about different versions ("Whether you first started playing the game on your IBM PC in 1987, 2018’s dazzling Tetris Effect, or the battle royale-esque Tetris 99..." from Polygon for example, emphasis mine). The game's Guinness World Record for having the most ports, the vagueness surrounding its official [https://tetris.com/by-the-numbers sales figure], and its inclusion on both the list of video games considered the best, meant for individual games, and list of best-selling video game franchises, mean for series of games, do not help.

I am considering starting an RfC on this matter. However, before I do, I would like some preliminary input and advice on how best to frame this RfC. Lazman321 (talk) 18:00, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

:This is clearly the series page; the first video game in the series is at Tetris (Spectrum HoloByte). There are too many versions of Tetris to call it "one video game". That would be like arguing that all games in platform fighter are actually Super Smash Bros. I think the inclusion of Tetris in "Video games considered the best" needs to be clarified; some versions of Tetris are far more poorly-received than others so its entry on the list is unhelpful and over-cited. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:25, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

::The problem is Tetris is like chess, in that it's essentially the same core game regardless of which version is played. Yes, there's mechanical variations between versions/editions, and expert Tetrisplayers pay close attention to the differences as they impact high-level play, but they're still all Tetris, which is why reliable sources (both VG-specific and general, as noted by Lazman above) write about it in such a way, treating them not as separate games, but as revisions of the same core game. We should follow their example because we follow the sources. oknazevad (talk) 19:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

:::The chess analogy is interesting. But chess is a historic tradition that belongs to no one, while Tetris is a modern product that is owned (for the most part) by The Tetris Company. Chess can be transmitted as a single game with many mutations because it's a public domain idea, while Tetris requires a license from the owner. (Not to mention that chess is a lofi game that anyone with a flat surface can homebrew, while every version of Tetris has a distinct developer because of the effort involved.) This is a bit of an abstract discussion, but it might show how we need to treat Tetris as something unique to itself. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

::::I'll add one more thought: there are so many unlicensed clones and knockoffs that not every game that imitates the mechanics of Tetris is a Tetris™ game. In a way, Tetris is a game, a series, and also a genre. Those clones are not actually Tetris games, but should be included somewhere, with the appropriate context. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:43, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

::PS, the Spectrum Holobyte version is not the first game, of course, just the first commercial release. Even if one considers the Elektronica 60 version more a prototype, the 1986 DOS version programmed by the then-16-year-old Vadim Gerasimov and distributed by what most would call a freeware model, precedes it. oknazevad (talk) 20:11, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

:::It's a really tricky one, and I see the arguments both for and against "it's like chess". So what's the "it's like chess" test? I guess one observation I have is that we don't write Chess and we don't write tetris. And no one owns chess, but someone owns Tetris. Popcornfud (talk) 20:08, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

::::These are both good points and why it's not a perfect analogy. The "revisions of the same game" treatment is probably a more accurate summary of how it's treated in sources. oknazevad (talk) 20:14, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::Yeah, the sources have to decide it, ultimately. Popcornfud (talk) 21:08, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::This is the way. Worst case, the sources have some disagreement on the subject, and we look for the most obvious way to reconcile them (e.g.: all are valid, or some are less reliable and flatly wrong.) Shooterwalker (talk) 21:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

:I've been running into this exact same issue with Minesweeper (which currently has a discussion going), and have been worried about Sokoban as well. In an ideal world, you would have 3+ articles: 1. an article on the game in the abstract (like chess), 2. an article about the franchise as owned by a corporation, and 3. an article about the first game released (among other notable releases of course). For Sokoban, this is almost certainly not a doable split. For Minesweeper, we currently have only the first two. For Tetris, we could in theory create all three, but it might still be an unwanted split. Until then, making the genre/mechanics of "Tetris" and the franchise as a whole one article seems reasonable. We don't really have a word for this kind of platonic ideal of a game, I think. I am reminded of Kriegsspiel as an older comparable concept, as it threads the same line. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:59, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

::I assume you mean Minesweeper (video game), not the warship for which it's named. oknazevad (talk) 13:40, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

:::Clearly I should create a discussion to change the primary topic [humorous] (thanks) ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 19:35, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

:I believe the game article should be referred to as a game, and the series article should be referred to as a series. I think anything else is overthinking it. Sergecross73 msg me 14:18, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

::I halfway agree, but I also sympathize with Maplestrip's point. There is sometimes a case for making an article about the game as a genre, in the sense of there being a generic version that isn't officially linked to the IP holder or creator. I don't think a separate article is absolutely necessary in this case. But the distinction is still important enough, to avoid conflating the clones with the series. A separate section would address this. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:34, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

::Tetris, like Minesweeper, consists of many, many games unrelated to each other but with the same overarching gameplay. Also like Minesweeper (and by extension Snake), all Tetris games (or the "Tetrisverse" as I like to call it) are usually grouped into one singular game. So would that make it a genre instead? Æ's old account wasn't working (talk) 14:58, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

:::I agree with the general description, though the difference is that "Tetris" remains an active (and defended) trademark of The Tetris Company, not a generic name. There's official Tetris and unofficial clones. In that regard it's like a the difference between an official Jenga set and one sold under a generic name like "Tumbling Tower". oknazevad (talk) 15:37, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

::::I would idealistically hope that legal trademark ownership would have little effect to how we refer to things. When you see a Tetris mobile game, you'd say, "that's a Tetris game" or simply "that's Tetris", even if it isn't licensed by The Tetris Company. Same goes for Jenga. I don't know what to do with that reality, though. 82.172.139.6 (talk) 10:19, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

{{closed rfc top|1=The conclusion to this is a bit mixed. "Video game" is the opinion majority of comments, but there's definitely a strong feeling that it's also "something" else, with mixed opinions on if that something else should be called a series or a genre or some other term. As a result, the first sentence should probably be something like {{tq|"Tetris (Russian: Тетрис)[a] is a puzzle video game created in 1985 by Soviet software engineer Alexey Pajitnov, which has since been released in a wide variety of versions under that name and others."}} --PresN 14:25, 5 June 2025 (UTC)}}

{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1747771266}}

Should Tetris be defined as a video game, a series of video games, or a video game genre? Lazman321 (talk) 19:17, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

• Series of video games The genre is puzzle game, or if it's close enough to Tetris, "Tetris clone" (rather than just "Tetris-type game"). That still means that the main series of games authorized to have this gameplay is known as Tetris. It's also not an individual video game, because the gameplay does change between installments in certain ways, and games like Tetris DS even have different gameplay modes that are not typical block falling. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:34, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
• Series of video games on the series article, "video game" on the specific video game article(s). Sergecross73 msg me 19:41, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
• Series of video games, echoing Sergecross73's rationale. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 20:57, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
• A video game with different versions and ports. Doom on a smart fridge is the "same game" as the original Doom on MS-DOS. Reading through the pre-RfC discussion above I am swayed by the argument that it is like chess and through its evolutions it is still the same game. Tetris is a game, and Tetris (Spectrum HoloByte) is the first commercial release of that game. Moritoriko (talk) 00:03, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

:: I want to expand on my above opinion in hopes that it may be more persuasive and provide what I think a good possible wording could be. I went through the list of games listed at List of Tetris variants and there seem to be 3 main categories of games. Tetris, the pure simple game, occasionally with slightly different mechanics (Pokémon Tetris has the additional mechanic of being able to flip a piece horizontally as well as rotating it.) Tetris with heavy variants or additional game modes such as the oft cited Puyo Puyo Tetris. Finally games that are Tetris only in name, like Hatris which has less connection to Tetris than Counterstrike has to Half-Life. To support this view, here are excerpts from 3 different articles about early games: "...they noted that the gameplay was unchanged from the original version."-Tetris Classic, ""It...has the same gameplay as the computer editions"-Tetris (Atari Games), "The Game Boy version of Tetris plays identically to versions on other platforms."-Tetris (Game Boy video game) These are, I would say, releases of Tetris on different consoles just like how in this article we regard the original Elektronika 60 and the IBM PC as the same game. Finally here is my proposed text:

:::"Tetris is a game created in 1985^[a] by Alexey Pajitnov, a Soviet software engineer. ... Pajitnov originally programmed the game on the Elektronika 60 and then ported it to the IBM PC with the help of Dmitry Pavlovsky and Vadim Gerasimov. ... Henk Rogers negotiated to get the rights to release Tetris on the Game Boy and the Nintendo Entertainment System. The Game Boy version became the best selling version of Tetris and one of the best-selling video games of all times. In the years since its release there have been numerous cross over games between Tetris and other franchises as well as games updating the original Tetris gameplay for new technology.

::Moritoriko (talk) 00:47, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

• A video game per my above comments. oknazevad (talk) 00:43, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
• A video game per preponderance of citations listed in above section (taken in good faith, as I have not done my own research). But {{em| also }} per Chess, which seems like a very useful analogy. Tetris comes in different visual and graphical releases, playable for people via many different ports to play on their different machines; chess can be played on different boards, with different visual styles, and in different sizes, or with pegs, or magnets or tiles to play in different settings. Tetris has different versions, with gameplay changes in some generations or releases to keep players interested; chess has different versions, in speed of play, or in odd rule sets (3D chess, Chess960, etc). But for both, the core page is still about a single game, at least as the lead describes it. — HTGS (talk) 01:42, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
• A video game or a type of video game is, I believe, the primary topic, separate from specific releases or the Tetris franchise. It is similar to chess, kriegsspiel, Snake (video game genre), and Minesweeper (video game), as games that are widely played through different media, adapted, and rereleased with tons of variations. The series owned by The Tetris Company is a separate topic. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:20, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
• A video game I'm basing this simply on the fact that most people would say "Tetris" referring to one game, or if you think of "Tetris" when it is mentioned it's one game specifically that comes to mind.--^🥑GUACPOCALYPSE^🥑 19:08, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
• Series of video games — Per above, primarily the arguments of Zxcvbnm. I would not oppose a separate article about "Tetris" as a genre or style, that includes official Tetris games as well as clones. But for this article, it is a series, and classifying it as a single game on this article would also necessitate that we reclassify every Tetris game as simply a version. That is especially silly for games like Tetris Effect which won awards like "[https://www.pushsquare.com/news/2019/09/days_gone_rides_off_with_three_nominations_in_this_years_golden_joystick_awards best PlayStation game]" and "[https://www.polygon.com/game-awards-tga/2018/12/6/18130000/the-game-awards-winners-2018 best VR/AR game]. This classification then means that we as editors have to draw that line somewhere: Is Hatris a game or a version of a game? What about Puyo Puyo Tetris — a crossover — or Puyo Puyo Tetris 2, which seems to me (and [https://www.gamespot.com/reviews/puyo-puyo-tetris-2-review/1900-6417623/ to reliable sources]) to clearly be a sequel to a previous game, not a different version of it. Comparisons to chess seem to me unfounded — one is a public-domain lowercase-titled tradition, and the other is a proper noun copyrighted and owned by The Tetris Company. Chess is a "game" like tag or basketball; Tetris is a "game" like Minecraft or Pokémon. DecafPotato (talk) 22:45, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
• Series of video games: Might as well throw my hat into the ring. After weighing the evidence, I believe that calling Tetris a series, perhaps with a footnote explaining the complication, may be what's best for our encyclopedia. To start off, while most sources do refer to Tetris as a game, I have found some sources that do refer to the "Tetris series" such as [https://kotaku.com/the-evolution-of-the-tetris-song-from-1987-to-today-1533072841 Kotaku], [https://www.eurogamer.net/sega-might-be-teasing-puyo-puyo-tetris-for-pc Eurogamer], [https://venturebeat.com/games/pit-blocks-3d-revives-a-virtual-boy-gem-for-pc/ VentureBeat], and [https://www.gamesradar.com/tetris-effects-soundtrack-is-now-available-to-stream-for-free/ GamesRadar+], meaning it would not violate WP:NOR. Most notably, [https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-67105983 this BBC article] explicitly considers Tetris the second-best-selling video game series rather than the best-selling video game of all time and provides an explanation as to why: mechanics differ between games, often to a great extent.

:There is a bit of a WP:NPOV dilemma in that calling Tetris a series rather than a game could be giving a minority view WP:UNDUE weight. However, this is an instance where WP:IAR might come into play. While referring to Tetris as a series might be inconsistent with most sources, I believe referring to Tetris as a game for this particular article would be worse for this encyclopedia, since the focus of this article encompasses many games that no one would reasonably just call a version of Tetris. Defining Tetris as a game and shifting the focus to that would lead to swaths of information being excluded despite their relevance and importance, and it would create a paradox in which the individual games are considered entries of a video game rather than a series. While a compromise solution, such as including a footnote or creating an article on the gameplay itself, would be welcome given the circumstances; at the present moment, this is the decision I am leaning toward. Lazman321 (talk) 20:42, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

• All It isn't that complicated. It is a game AND a series AND can be used as a genre like roguelike. Article on first Tetris game, it's a game. Article on Tetris series, it's a series. Wyll Ravengard (talk) 22:09, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
• :I agree, but I think the unstated question here is which one we use to describe “Tetris” in the lead. In this case, I think the article is primarily about a game, with relevant details and sections describing the other facets of it. — HTGS (talk) 03:25, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
• A video game is what reliable sources overwhelmingly call Tetris. A "video game series" is a continuum of strictly official video games, including sequels and remakes, but not clones and unofficial variants. Referring to it as a series (a minority view) would contradict the definitions of several other games. Space Invaders is not a series just because there are clones of it; Minesweeper is not a series just because there are multiple Minesweeper games; chess is not a series just because there are different variants of it. Unofficial variants of a game do not make it a "series". And while games such as Hatris exist and differ from archetypal Tetris gameplay, they were never claimed to be part of any "Tetris series". This would also completely disregard the many, many articles on Wikipedia that refer to it as a video game, including World Video Game Hall of Fame (Tetris is an inductee, and one of the first games to be inducted), List of video games considered the best (Tetris is the most cited game on the list), and Game canon (Tetris is the highest-ranked game on the list). Æ's old account wasn't working (talk) 13:04, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
• :Just FYI, game canon lists the 1985 version of Tetris specifically, which was the IBM PC port that was released in the Soviet Union. In other words, [https://tetris.wiki/Tetris_(IBM_PC) this version], which doesn't have a Wikipedia page. The link only goes here because I assume the game is not notable, not because this page is specifically about that version. Your argument here is based on a faulty premise. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:32, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
• ::Game canon actually lists Tetris as a 1988 video game, meaning the 1988 DOS version, not the 1985 version. The formula being used to determine the game canon's ranking also uses Tetris (the game canon's highest ranked game) as an example; however, the box art they use to represent "Tetris" is the one for the 1989 NES version, meaning no specific version of Tetris is included in the game canon. Nowhere does the game canon hint at Tetris comprising more than one game. Æ's old account wasn't working (talk) 08:54, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
• :::Or some intern just gave it the wrong box art. Let's not read into it more than it should be. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:30, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
• A video game because it's not a "series" in the sense that Uncharted or Zelda are video games series. And it's not a genre, but it was the beginning of a new genre, as the [https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20230329-why-tetris-is-the-perfect-video-game BBC] quotes, {{tq|"'[Tetris] basically created the puzzle genre in video gaming, proving these types of games were worthwhile,' opines Brian Brown, the comic artist behind Tetris: The Games People Play, a critically acclaimed book."}} When in doubt, check the sources. Tetris is a puzzle video game that sparked the creation of endless spin-offs. pickalittletalkalittle^🐤🐤🐤talk a lot pick a little more 22:11, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
• A video game The article is about the original video game Tetris. The various incarnations and ports of the original game for different platforms do not constitute "sequels" which is what would be required for this to be a series. We do not consider the same game on different platforms to be "a series" even if there are substantial differences between versions (as there often are, given hardware limitations). To be a series requires formal sequels, but the followups aren't even close to the same level of notability that justify treating all the games part of a singular "series". The article notes subsequent versions, clones etc - but the principle subject of the article is the original game, singular, and this is wholly consistent with how the majority of sources refer to it. Void if removed (talk) 10:47, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

• For those saying that Tetris is a single game, I should point to games like Hatris, which are technically part of the series but have entirely different gameplay than your standard falling Tetriminos. Even if it were determined that Tetris gameplay by itself should have an article, it would still need a series page anyway. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:33, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
• :For what it’s worth, many articles discuss topics that are peripheral to their central subject. And the existence of technically discrete subjects does not imply that they all need discrete articles. If the subject of Tetris gameplay is best discussed at Tetris, then there is no need for a breakout article. The same logic of course applies for Tetris (series), except that for that subject we actually have enough material that it makes sense for it to exist standalone. — HTGS (talk) 21:37, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
• :How is it "part of the series"? It was developed by the same guy, also has falling objects, and the name ends in -tris but the article doesn't say that it is claimed to be a part of a series in any way. Moritoriko (talk) 01:36, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
• :I don't agree that it's part of a series, simply because when someone says "Tetris" are you thinking of multiple games initially or one specific game? I believe most would say just one specific game. ^🥑GUACPOCALYPSE^🥑 19:04, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
• ::When I hear "Overwatch", I also think of a single game, but the existence of Overwatch 2 means we do not apply the logic that "Overwatch" is a single game with multiple variants — {{small|even if it basically is lmao}} — because it is treated and titled as a separate game, just as Tetris 2 means we do not treat Tetris as all one game. DecafPotato (talk) 22:47, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
• :::Rather than compare to Overwatch, I think a better comparison would be to Space Invaders (which links to an article about the original game while also including some information about Remakes and sequels [its words]) and then there is the article List of Space Invaders video games which describes and links to various individual later versions and we already have a similar article for List of Tetris variants.
• :::As for your questions in the Survey sections:
• :::Hatris is a different game made by the same guy with some of the same mechanics and some new ones. Puyo Puto Tetris is a different crossover game from Tetris and Puyo Puyo Tetris 2 is a sequel of PPT, not a sequel of Tetris.
• :::And actually I think Minecraft is another good example for this article, Tetris just happened to exist in a time where you couldn't push software updates to players. Minecraft directs to the game, but there are also articles for Minecraft: Story Mode which is a different game that is based on the same IP, they aren't "in the same world" as you can argue for Pokemon.
• :::Moritoriko (talk) 23:44, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
• Just a thought I had regarding the Tetris-as-a-single-game phrasing. Firstly, let's be clear that I'm not thinking of "game" as a discrete creative work, the way most video games are analogous to films, albums, novels, or other entitled creative works. It's more like describing a sport. Just as different competitions in basketball have their own rulebooks (FIBA, NBA, NCAA, etc) which have also evolved over time, but are still quite clearly playing basketball, different versions of Tetris have rule peculiarities, but it's still essentially the same game where the essentials of gameplay are recognizable and consistent. Just wanted to clarify that thought. oknazevad (talk) 15:08, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
• I've noticed that some votes are saying that this article is about the original game. That's false: the original game is the Elektronica 60 version, which has a few paragraphs dedicated to it at most. Even if the argument is that it's a game with multiple versions, the article also touches upon spin-offs that would not reasonably be considered just a version of Tetris. If we decide that the article should define Tetris as a game based on that rationale, I do worry about all the significant and relevant information, such about the series history or sales, that could get removed. Lazman321 (talk) 16:21, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
• :Or we could just not be rigid about the article's content, as it's is a bit of a distinct situation. As I said in my last post, we cannot and should not interpret the descriptor as being a rigid definition. oknazevad (talk) 16:47, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

{{closed rfc bottom}}

{{Template:Did you know nominations/Tetris}}

{{Wikipedia:Peer review/Tetris/archive1}}