Talk:Rayman Legends Retold

Standalone article for Rayman Legends Retold

@CNMall41, Zzz plant, ZooBlazer, OceanHok, Kaii-El, and Rhain: I wanted to discuss the recent blank-and-redirect of Rayman Legends Retold to Rayman Legends. I am also pinging a few editors active in video game articles for broader input on whether this should remain a redirect, be draftified, or be restored in a shorter form.

I understand the game has recently been announced and that some coverage is announcement-based. However, I do not think all the sources are primary or PR coverage. The accepted article cited multiple independent reliable secondary sources, including:

• Game Informer – hands-on coverage based on two hours of play, discussing the remake's 3D visual approach, new levels, new music stages, dragon-riding sequences, Cave of Trials challenges, and changes from the original game.
• Video Games Chronicle – feature/interview coverage from Ubisoft Montpellier, discussing the remake's development, technology, changes from the original game, and what it may mean for the future of the Rayman series.
• Video Games Chronicle – technical interview coverage about the Nintendo Switch 2 version, including performance targets, ray tracing, resolution scaling, and platform-specific development.
• GameSpot – coverage discussing why the remake is more than a routine visual update and how it may function as a foundation for the series going forward.
• PC Gamer – coverage of the remake's soundtrack and the involvement of Christophe Héral and Grant Kirkhope.

Because the article passed AfC and appears to have more than routine announcement coverage, I would like to ask whether there is consensus to restore it in a shorter, better-sourced form. I understand that blanking and redirecting can be appropriate, but if editors still feel the subject is not ready for mainspace under notability and significant coverage, I would prefer draftifying it rather than blanking it.

Thanks. Umais🗣 07:48, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

I've reverted the BLAR. I understand the reasoning, but I think the article is in good enough shape for now, with lots of high-quality references, and it will obviously only grow from here. (At the very least, the existing article probably should have been draftified—and, ideally, its content merged with Rayman Legends § Remake—rather than simply blanked.) – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 08:00, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for including me in the conversation! The way I see it, you went through the proper channels to get the article passed through AfC with quality sources and notability, so it definitely shouldn't have been blanked / redirected without at least a discussion. The game is also, if I'm not mistaken, more than most video game remakes, so having its own article is valid in my opinion. Kaii-El (talk) 09:41, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

My opinion is that remake/remaster should not get their own article unless they have significant gameplay upgrades/changes). I think there is enough here to justify a standalone article, but I do understand the rationale to merge it back to the main Rayman Legends article (which is quite underdeveloped, to be honest). OceanHok (talk) 15:43, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Rayman Legends Retold rebuilds Rayman Legends with 3D visuals while retaining side-scrolling gameplay?

• Source: Game Informer reported that Rayman Legends Retold is a 3D remake and that "under the hood of the 3D staging is still the same 2D bones".

• ALT1: ... that Ubisoft said Rayman Legends Retold could help pave the way for more adventurous 3D Rayman games?

• Source: GamesRadar+ reported that Rayman brand producer Loïc Gounon said Ubisoft believed it might be time to return to "more adventurous 3D Rayman games", and that such a direction was "the plan if everything goes well".

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Pizza Cat
  • Comment: Article was recently created/moved to mainspace.

Moved to mainspace by Umais Bin Sajjad (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 5 past nominations.

Umais🗣 07:35, 11 June 2026 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article is new enough and long enough. Hook facts are interesting, though "rebuilds" may get kickback as the game hasn't been released yet. Copyvio tool finds no issues. Looks good to go!  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:13, 17 June 2026 (UTC)