Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Arcade/Archive 1

Archive 1

See also: Infobox template discussion

To-do list

• Design a standard {{template}} for all arcade game articles (see discussion 1 and 2)

• Find a uniform postfix for ambigous titles, and rename those that do not follow the rule. Right now we have "(game)", "(video game)" and "(arcade game)". I think "(arcade game)" is the best one. (see discussion)

---

Game lists (with/without infobox, stubs etc)

These lists are now on the page Wikipedia:WikiProject_Arcade_Games/lists.

---

Using MAME to get screenshots

All of the screenshots I take using MAME seem to be about 4K in size. Any idea what I'm doing wrong? --ChicXulub 18:23, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

4K as in 4kB? That's not much .. but since you didnt say which OS and how you do them... I made all screenshots with Gimp (Linux).

--Tjansen 18:44, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm using Windows 98 and I take the screenshots by pressing the F12 key. --ChicXulub 18:51, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You're using F12 from MAME, no doubt. 4K is not much, but look at the format you're using. For a game with complex graphics, like Mortal Kombat, you'll want to save it in JPEG format. It's lossy, but its the only acceptible format Wikipedia can use for photo-like images. If you have a simple graphic, such as a screengrab from Burgertime, you'll want to save it as a PNG. The resulting PNG file will be crisper and smaller than the corresponding JPEG file. PNG is compressed, but is only suitable for images with few colors, because of the way it compresses images. I think you can also use GIF images, but PNG and JPEG will be smaller. HTH. — Frecklefoot | Talk 19:01, Aug 17, 2004 (UTC)

---

Naming of articles

First off, I'd like to say that this project seems to have really taken off and I appreciate everyone's help. Some contributors have done a lot more work than I have!

Next, I'd like to suggest that we name any new articles in an unambiguous manner. There are a lot of articles named [[Cool game (game)|Cool game]]. While, when the article was created there was no other entry for "Cool game," a board game or some other type of game may come along and result in a clash. We can't depend on that later editor to correctly move it to [[Cool game (arcade game)]]. Therefore, I suggest when you find an article named [[Cool game (game)]], you move it to [[Cool game (arcade game)]]. Most arcade games, such as Galaxian don't need the suffix since the words are unique and are unlikely to be supplanted in the future. This convention only applies to games that have names that may result in a clash. For example, I just changed the article name for Reactor from [[Reactor (game)]] to [[Reactor (arcade game)]].

I think this should apply to video and computer games as well that began as arcade games. If there are no objections to this, I'll post the policy in the main project page in the near future. Comments? — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:13, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

I think (game) would be better since many of the arcade games have ports to various other platforms and the articles are not specific enough to warrant the title of arcade game -- 00:25, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Right now, some are not specific enough. But then they should either be rewritten to describe the arcade version (assuming that it's the original), or be splitted into two seperate articles--Tjansen 18:34, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

As I stated, I prefer (arcade game). The other versions, which could be computer games or video games, can have their own articles. (game) is just way too ambiguous. The problem is, we don't have a term that describes video, arcade and computer games under one, unifying term. "Video game," according to Wikipedia, refers to games played on video game consoles. "Computer game" refers to those played on home computers. "Arcade game" refers to what this project is about, games played in an arcade.

So, I suggest we do what Tjansen suggested and make the articles about the arcade versions. Then, if it warrants it, break it into two articles, one with (arcade game) and the other with (video game). How does that sound? — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:56, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

---

Standard template

The problem with the template is that templates cannot contain optional parameters or contain conditional sections. We would at least need two templates (with and without picture) and maybe even four (with and without game designer). Or we could wait and hope that it will be possible in a future version.--Tjansen 18:34, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think you're confusing "template" with "infobox." We have an infobox, which editors can edit to their liking and/or needs. A template is something that is stamped on every arcade game article (such as at the bottom of this article). I couldn't think of one that would suit every arcade game, so that's why I opened it up for discussion. :-) It's possible that arcade games just aren't well-suited for this feature. And that's fine; I'd like to design one only if it makes sense for this subject. — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:56, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

I was talking about an infobox template. Didnt know that you meant a footer template. --Tjansen 21:28, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Cool! I didn't know we could make one template and insert it in several articles with parameters. I was talking about a footer template, but this looks like a great approach for our infobox templates. It looks like we're approaching it correctly--testing it out as a static infobox first. But it looks like the title section should be bold instead of italicized. Should we use these parametized templates (I didn't read the whole page, but it sounds like a good idea). It sure would save a lot of time and could be updated as we saw fit. :-) — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:29, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)

I have created a template at Template:Infobox_Arcade_Game and converted Super Sprint. The syntax is shown on Template_talk:Infobox_Arcade_Game. I am not happy with the image parameter yet. And some parameter names are longer than desirable, because you can't use a parameter name if there is a template of the same name. For instance 'cabinet' and 'date' were already taken... --Tjansen 11:58, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I think it looks great, but it sure does have a lot of parameters! I guess there is no way around that, though. Should we promote it to the main project page or do you have some more tweaking to do? — Frecklefoot | Talk 01:40, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

The template itself is finished, but it can't be used for arcade games without screenshot, and the designer field can't be empty be either. There is no way around it, except creating new templates for these cases or waiting for the Extended template syntax --Tjansen 16:27, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Lets wait then since a lot of games we missing screenshots for many games and don't know who the designers were for most. — Frecklefoot | Talk 19:09, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

Genre

I had a few problems with Computer_and_video_game_genres: Which genre is Contra (arcade games)? There is no shoot'n'run genre, and I couldnt find any such game in the examples. I also had problems finding a genre for Arkanoid.--Tjansen 17:01, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Contra is a Scrolling shooter. I made a change to the article to reflect that. I'd call Arkanoid a retro game or a fixed shooter or a sports game. Gosh that is a tough one, isn't it? I've never really had to think what kind of genre that game is, since you're really playing against yourself (trying not to miss the ball). A skill game (new category!)? — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:49, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)

To stick my nose in, Arkanoid is just one of many Pong-based games. Perhaps the genre listing for it should reflect this. ~ FriedMilk 21:05, 2004 Sep 3 (UTC)

While I think it contains some elements reminiscent of Pong, I don't think it is fairly characterized as a Pong-based game. What genre is Pong? It is certainly meant to be reminscent of Ping Pong, but does that make it a sport game? — Frecklefoot | Talk 21:15, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps I should be more clear, and call it a Breakout clone, like Alleyway and a million online variations. ~ FriedMilk 21:18, 2004 Sep 3 (UTC)

But there is no genre for Pong or Breakout either (except Retro, but that doesnt help for new games). Basically I like skill game, but on the other hand, I don't know any other skill game that is not Breakout-related--Tjansen 12:13, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I think Ball and Paddle game would work, as that covers Pong,Breakout and its clones. That's what KLOV uses for Breakout, and a google search gets about 7000 hits. I'm not keen on retro, as that doesn't cover more recent variants, or skill game, as it isn't very descriptive, as most games use skill. I'm not that keen on sports game for pong either, as most of the details of table tennis are abtracted away. Silverfish 19:46, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Footer templates

I have a couple of ideas for footer templates for this here project. What are your ideas? Do we even need one?

The first idea here is a "timeline" sort of thing. It'd let you browse games by year. I think it'd be useful, but then we'd have to create a whole bunch of new lists of arcade games by the year they came out--right now the only list is alphabetical. It'd look something like this here:

Of course the links would point to things like "1986 arcade games" or "List of 1986 arcade games" instead of the years as they do now. But, like I said, this would require us to make lists for each one. Maintaining each list would be a bear.

Next, we could have a footer for games in a series, such as Donkey Kong. We'd need a template for each series, which could get old. Conversely we could just hard-code them into each article in the series. For example (for Donkey Kong Jr.):

Legacy
Preceded by			Succeeded by
Donkey Kong	Donkey Kong Junior		Donkey Kong 3

What 'cha all think on both? Needed? Ugly? Stupid? Useful? Other ideas? — Frecklefoot | Talk 20:10, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)

I don't know Wikipedia's category system yet, but wouldnt it be possible to make a category for each year? Then make the 'release date' year in the infobox link to the category, and (tada!) you have an auto-maintained list for every year. Concerning the game series/legacy box: I think the template should include all games of the series. --Tjansen 12:19, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Categories are incredibly easy to create. All you do is put something like this: [[Category:1984 arcade games]] at the end of the article and voila, you have a category! Until you fill in a description for the category, however, it will show up as a broken link. I've created dozens of categories myself, so I know how to go about doing it. We could change all the [[Category:Arcade games]] to the appropriate year, e.g. [[Category:1984 arcade games]]. I hadn't thought of that--categories would be perfect for this. Each year category would be a sub-category of [[Category:Arcade games]] of course.

Good point on the series footer. Since most arcade game series only have 2 to maybe four games in the entire series, including all of them would make sense. Thanks for the feedback. Anymore? — Frecklefoot | Talk 01:44, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

What about a game like DDR? Or Street Fighter II? I have seen a few info boxes contain a huge amount of data, so it could work, but I think you would want to make a special version for notable exceptions such as those.- Mee Ronn 09:16, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Popularity/notability metrics

So far, we seem to have articles on most of the obvious arcade games, e.g. Asteroids, Rainbow Islands, Breakout. I think it would be useful to have some figures to work out how notable games are. This might help us work out what games to write about.

The metrics could include sales figures, figures for money put into the machines, sales figures for console/PC adaptations, etc. This may reveal that we have most of the notable games already, but might also reveal suprising ommissions as well.

The problem is, I'm not sure where to look for this sort of information, and wondered if someone else knows where to find it. Silverfish 22:36, 26 Sep 2004

Well, yes, that would be interesting. But the best resource that I know is the KLOV Top 100. And it's not perfect, for instance it does not contain Street Fighter 2 (probably because there are a million different versions, so everybody voted for a different one)--Tjansen 22:51, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I don't know of a resource for sales either. The problem is, how do you measure "sales"? How many games were produced or how much money did all the machines in use garner? The former doesn't seem to be a very good indicator--a game that is wildly popular may not have been produced in large numbers (though unlikely). The latter is probably impossible to gather data on.

Also, Silverfish, please sign your posts. :-) — Frecklefoot | Talk 17:44, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

I agree, sales figures are more problematic for arcade games, although the number of machines sold would presumedly correspond loosely to how popular a game is, after all, arcade owners are going to be more likely to buy the more popular games. All I thinking of here is rough metrics, to get some ideas for what we still have to write about, and see how good are coverage is. Sales figures were just an example though, if other metrics exist, such as the KLOV top 100, they could be useful too.

Also, I normally do sign my posts, but thanks for reminding me Frecklefoot. I've signed the original post retrospectively. Silverfish 11:56, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yes, my friend's book says that Ms. Pac-Man was the most successful arcade game ever, but I don't know where he got his data. I think most data of this sort will be apocryphal unless taken from something like the manufacturers website itself, though the numbers even they give may be inflated. — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:00, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)

Categorize game by year?

If you look at the Footer templates discussion, we had raised the issue of categorizing arcade games by year, much like computer and video games are done now (e.g. Category:1984 computer and video games). bumm13 brought up this subject again and its prompted me to think that perhaps we should go ahead and start categorizing arcade games in this manner (e.g. [[Category:1984 arcade games]]). What does everyone else think? As an added bonus, we could then go ahead and start using the footer template if we wanted to. — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:21, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)

I would be all for this type of categorization of arcade games, as it would help clarify Wikipedia preferred protocol on the matter.--Bumm13 22:48, Oct 10, 2004

But there should be a clear rule which year to take, especially for arcade games which may have ports described on the same page. For instance, it would not make much sense to add Pac-Man to [[Category:2002 arcade games]] only because it has been ported to a mobile phone in 2002...--Tjansen 22:47, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"Arcade game" would have to be strictly defined as the game in its original coin-operated arcade version. This information is very easy to find and verify. For example, Pac-Man could have both a [[Category:1980 arcade games]] and [[Category:1982 computer and video games]] category (the first official port to a home console was the poorly designed 1982 Atari 2600 version). I don't see why this would be difficult to do.--Bumm13 15:38, Oct 10 2004 (UTC)

I liked this idea, so I took it upon myself to create categories for 1980 through 1989. Brideck 5:33, Mar 24 2005 (UTC)

The created categories have been nominated for deletion a few days ago and will be deleted if nobody acts on it. I realize that there was no consensus to make them and they are currently not really even used but by voting you can bring the topic up again. --TheDotGamer ^Talk June 30, 2005 04:56 (UTC)

Would it be time well spent if I went through many of the arcade articles and added the appropriate 'year category'? Starting with games from the 1980's that are on the list of arcade games seems to be a good start. Is there any reason I shouldn't do this? -Mee Ronn 8 July 2005 00:37 (UTC)

No, there wouldn't be. Actually, I already started. I also created the remaining categories. I didn't start by going through the 1980's games though, I started alphabetically. I took care of the numerics and letter A's from list of arcade games and Category:Arcade games. It is not necessary to list the games in Category:Arcade games anymore, so just delete that category reference in the articles and replace it with the respective year category. --TheDotGamer ^Talk 09:21, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Awesome. I'll start helping this weekend. -Mee Ronn 06:35, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Timeline

Someone needs to create a timeline of arcade games history. This should include these many seperate elements as notable dates:

• Dates when major selling and influential games came out, like Street Fighter 2 etc.
• Industry milestones, such as when midway stopped producing arcade games
• Tecnological milestones, even if the game was not popular or well known at the time. Such as Crossbow by exidy being the first game with fully digitized sound and music, I Robot being the first 3d game etc.
• games which invented a new genre, even if that particular game was not popular at the time. Such as black widow inventing the smash tv style game

Also, will everyone PLEASE stop saying that arcades died because home console systems "caught up"? That makes no logical sense. Its true that consoles "caught up" but saying that implies that there was some upward barrier to arcade development. Obviously thats not the case, an arcade game can always use the latest chip, more ram, etc. then any console or PC out there at the time. The real reason arcade game makers stoped trying to be ahead of the technology curve is because the practice of high game turnover in japanese arcades (in japan essentially the expectation is that games will be swapped out every 3 months or so instead of ever year in the USA) caused the Japanese dominated industry to focus on standardized system like arcade consoles like the NEO GEO CPS2 and the PS1 based arcade systems which obviously quickly fell behind the technology curve. --67.180.61.179

67.180.61.179, you're more than welcome to come up with the timeline yourself since you seem to know so much about the subject matter. Of course, all contributions here are voluntary and if someone doesn't feel like doing something (like the timeline you mention), they probably won't. If you do so, please create an account first (talking to an IP number is so impersonal) and sign your posts (with 4 tildes ~~~~). I signed your post above for you, but please take care of it yourself in the future.

Secondly, it is a matter of opinion why US arcades died out. The theory you present above is one opinion. The sources I use state that the home console market largely killed the arcade market. There are still some arcade games out there that push the technology envelope, but not many (at least in the US). — Frecklefoot | Talk 21:15, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

I tottaly agree it is a matter of opinion why US arcades died out, but I don't think Im making my point clear. I agree that home console and PC market largely killed the arcade market, and that majority opinion is notable and should be talked about in articles. But in saying this you should make absolutely clear that there was no technical reason for that, as if there was an upward limit to increasing the power of arcade hardware. Obviously at any point an arcade game can come out with the most expensive next generation of hardware. The reason I say to make this clear because everyone I've ever talked to this about (and I've talked to many, working in arcades, programming video games, attending video game industry conventions as a reporter) just sort of had this vauge impression that there was some inherent advantage in console hardware, as if they had exclusive acsess to chips that no one else could duplicate, and that arcades were inherintly doomed. Its possible that staying on the leading edge ceased to be profitable to US arcade gamemakers after 1994, but the most common reason I've seen for arcade gamemakers loosing the leading edge is the practice of high arcade turnover in Japan causing those makers to move en masse to standardized "arcade consoles", which was almost assuredly the only way to stay profitable.

I realize I'm coming in later here, but I'm curious about the statement: "black widow inventing the smash tv style game". Black widow, according to KLOV, is known as the combination of Robotron 2084 and vector graphics. Both games were released in 1982 but I have no idea as to which came out first (I'll assume Black Widow). And while Robotron might not have came out first, it is certainly a more prominent game in arcade history. I would say Smash TV is closer to Robotron 2084, seeing as Jarvis created both. One last point: when looking back at what defined the FPS genre on the PC, people say DOOM began the revolution, even though Wolfenstien 3D was first. Dates may be irrelavant considering that Robotron 2084 was the arcade game that set the standard. -Mee Ronn 08:19, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wolfenstien 3D definately did usher in the era of first-person shooters, not DOOM. But both were developed by id Software. But this discussion is more appropriate for the Computer and video games WikiProject. If you see a reference to the wrong game, change it. :-) — Frecklefoot | Talk 15:16, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I didn't make make self clear. I was just meaning that when people talk about FPS games, in general, they are most commonly referred to as "Doom clones", at least until the term "first-person shooter" was developed. I wasn't trying to agrue which way Wolf3D/Doom went, just meaning that the Black Widow/Robotron issue might be similar. Someone felt strongly enough to use Black Widow as springboard for the genre and I'm curious as to why. I shall move my debates to that article though. Sorry for the confusion -Mee Ronn 18:23, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Joining the group

What does it take so that one can add their name to the "participants" list? I'm asking because I rewrote the Sinistar article and added the infobox and I'd like to do more, but I don't want to step on anyone's feet. --Woohookitty 01:12, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

That's all it takes. Thanks for joining us!

Currently there is an argument regarding the "standard" infobox raging between AshShert and myself. Tjansen has also contributed a bit (on my side, for the most part). AshShert is not a participant in the project, but has been making some unpopular changes to the infoboxes across most of the arcade game articles.

What it boils down to is AshSert wants hardware info included in the arcade infobox (he also created his own version of the infobox which he replaced ours with without any request for comment—I've since reverted it, but you can see it in the history). I said the hardware info can go into the article under a different section, because it takes up too much space in the infobox. Tjansen says we don't need the information at all. AshSert is unwilling to abide to either suggestion. Chime in if you like. — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:11, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)

I'm not tooting my own horn, but if you guys want to see the work I've done, I wrote Kangaroo (arcade game) and Mr. Do (how did we not have a Mr. Do page) from scratch and I added alot to Sinistar. I need to work on Rally-X tonight yet.

Anyway, I'm kind of split on it. I do think that we should have the processor in there, simply because Z80 at least has a page on it. So I think that's noteworthy. But I'm not sure how helpful the resolution section is since at least for older games, they almost all had standard resolution, 16/32 colors and some variation on 240X200. So I'd say...keep the processor info...but everything else is kind of useless. I think that maybe once we get beyond the early games, we can put resolution and such in, but for now... --Woohookitty 22:22, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I'd just like to say hello and I'm joining the group. I'm new to wiki and this whole arcade project thing, but I started off by adding Dungeons & Dragons: Shadow over Mystara. I've tried to format it correctly, although I'm pretty sure I still have some tense mistakes in there. I'll be adding more details later -Mee Ronn 03:21, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Looks good, Mee. Nice job! --Woohookitty 03:30, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I also joined the group (eeerr, well I added my name to the list). I started the article G-LOC. When I found this Wikiproject group, I modified the article to match the project standard. Next on my list is to make the Afterburner articles to match the project style. Felsir 07:12, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

Infoboxes in Dance Dance Revolution

I added the arcade infobox to the Dance Dance Revolution article a few weeks ago, but the article deals with the series in general and not any of the particular games. DDR has (a lot of different versions), and several of them have individual articles. I thought it would be better to put it on the main article since the machine is virtually the same for each arcade version (aside from DDR Solo, which is technically a different series). The only infobox detail that would change would be the release date.

Also, the infobox currently has a picture of the machine, rather than a game screenshot (which is further down the page). I believe it should stay this way, since DDR is more recognizable for its cabinet design than its gameplay screen, and it gives a better idea of how the game is played. --Poiuyt Man (talk) 10:12, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Problems with AshSert/Mr. Do

As it is apparent in many discussions on this page, this user is hindering the project significantly by applying changes to a large number of articles. I suggest we move for a ban. --Poiuyt Man (talk) 12:28, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

I agree, what is up with this guy?--JiFish 15:13, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

I'd second that! He's vandalized so many articles in the past, creating more work for others in the project. The guy doesn't exercise Wikiquette. — Frecklefoot | Talk 19:17, May 16, 2005 (UTC)

The vandalism is here a standard = the gigantic info box, I wanted to make only what new against it, sorry. OK, now we play we democracy, no problem. :)

I have not other boxes change, only Pacman. Mr.Do! 18:36, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Kick Harness

I notice that there is no entry for kick harness yet. Am I just using a term that is uncommon? This is what a kick harness is to me: The extra wiring that is needed to support games that have more controls than what a JAMMA harness can handle (that is more than 2 joysticks and/or more than 8 buttons). It goes from the switches straight in the PCB. They are especially common in fighters because of the 6 button per player layout. CPS-2 'B Boards' have a spot for the kick harness to plug-in to. I've also heard it simple called 'kick' or just 'harness', athough I'm not sure of which of them is more accurate and/or common. Is there another name for this wiring connection that is what I should be using? -Mee Ronn 18:35, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Not really in the arcade game restoration scene, I don't know if this is the common term or not. I say go ahead make the article. If it's wrong, it can be changed. But name it Kick harness (small 'h') in order to make it conform to the standard naming convention. :-) — Frecklefoot | Talk 20:16, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

Certainly. I recall now it's also called the "extra harness". And games which require its use that are JAMMA boards are often called JAMMA+ (although some games use the empty pins at 25, 26, c, and d to wire buttons instead of using a seperate kick). The Street Fighter games and Mortal Kombat games all require kick harnesses, and are called JAMMA+. At least, as far as I know. I'll start the article out with some basic info that I know is true and hopefully someone else will be able to back up or disprove some of these other details. Thanks! -Mee Ronn 20:37, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

And it's made. I'm open to criticism, please feel free to give me feedback or simply edit the article. I'm new to the scene and I would like my articles to feel like part of the team's. -Mee Ronn 21:39, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Finding Sources

When writing about older games, especially those in the "golden age", it is very easy to find documentation to back up what we write. Sources are easy to find as books that cover that time are plentiful. Supercade is a great example. But, what about games that are from the mid 90's and after, especially lesser known ones. I have my personal experiences, game manuals, the actual game... but none of that can fill up a "Sources" list (the game manual perhaps, although most of them contain only technical data). I'd also figure that most websites (beyond a site like KLOV) don't really hold any sort of weight in terms of accuracy or legitimacy. So, any ideas on how to make the data in articles where there isn't some sort of official word on things feel more true? -Mee Ronn 29 June 2005 08:56 (UTC)

Don't worry about it too much. With current trends, gaming articles such as Goomba and Link (Legend of Zelda) have achieved featured article status with only a handful of references (mostly the instruction manuals). Video games simply don't have a lot of detailed material written about them, so like books and movies, the best source of information is the subject itself. Fact-checking still needs to be possible, though, so any information in a game article should be backed up with a clear description of how that information can be accessed in the game (examples: "Pressing A, Z, and left at the menu screen causes...", "In level 5-2, after the second pipe..."). A screenshot can also be used to verify a statement.

The following paragraph from Wikipedia:Cite sources addresses the problem of finding sources for information that is not commonly written about:

Disputed information which, if verified, would remain in an article, should be placed on the article's talk page. Potentially useful information ought to be retained — and by placing disputed information on the talk page, you give other users the opportunity to find sources to support it, in which case the information could be re-inserted into the article proper. This guideline does not endorse or mandate that all unsourced information must be removed: it is recognised that some information is self-evident and that a source for it might not be necessary, or that something may be true and accurate but as-yet unsourced.

Wikipedia:Verifiability is also a good guide for dealing with a lack of sources. -Poiuyt Man ^talk 30 June 2005 13:46 (UTC)

Monitor in infobox

A small question about the Monitor section of the new infobox: The old infobox had this information in several parts, usually Orientation and Type. How is this to be handled in the new boxes, especially when converting from the old ones? Spottedowl 02:14, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

However seems logical. I think most participants were against including the monitor orientation (I was in favor of it). You can see Xenophobe to see how I handled it, though that may not be optimal. Since the infobox is just a suggestion, however you handle it should be fine. If you choose to not include it at all, I doubt it will be missed. HTH — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:22, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

I think we edefinately need different parts for the monitor data, just for uniformity if anything. --larsinio 14:04, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Infobox Genre

I'm not sure if linking to Computer and video game genres in the Genre entry is a good idea. That page changes frequently. Wouldn't it be better just to link to the pages for the genres (e.g. Genre: Shoot 'em up)? Spottedowl 17:42, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it would. I think when the infobox started, the genres didn't have seperate articles. Now that they do, linking to their articles would be preferable. — Frecklefoot | Talk 20:01, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

Video game industry footer

I've been experimenting with a footer to link all the video game industry articles. If you like, pop on over to my sandbox to see what I've been doing. I'd appreciate any input. But please put any comments on the Talk page, don't modify the templates directly (but you can add one if you like).

The members of the Computer and video games WikiProject have alredy started weighing in, but it's still not too late! Thanks! — Frecklefoot | Talk 19:18, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

This is now complete. You can check it out at Template:Vg-industry (or look below). — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:03, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

{{vg-industry}}

Galaxian series infobox

I noticed that Larsinio has started adding a new infobox (Template:Galaxian Series) to the Galaxian series articles:

Galaxian series
Arcade games
Galaxian | Galaga | Gaplus/Galaga 3 | Galaga '88
Laserdisc/Special Edition games
Galaxian3 | Attack Of The Zolgear

While I think it's useful, I don't think it is the most attractive infobox I've ever seen. Does anyone want to take a shot at improving it? — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:03, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

I like --Herzog 01:02, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

I had a little go at it; the only problems I had were that the text was too small, and the title didn't stand out against the section headings. Spottedowl 11:22, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Also, I don't know if it matters, but it would look more Galaxiany in a blue/purple/pink colourscheme. :) Spottedowl 11:26, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

I think it should have the same colour scheme as the videogame infobox. It looks rather weird with two different styled infoboxes on one page. Felsir 13:14, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

how about this? It mimics the other videogame infoboxes:

Felsir 13:27, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Well I, for one, like it better. :-) — Frecklefoot | Talk 21:50, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

It's all good, I like green thats all :) Feel free to change the original template. Im not a big fan of that list of video games being there. Maybe it should be something like List of arcade shooters? Its just a very general category and doesnt really apply ot teh template.. My original template is basically a cut n paste of all the templates I see around here on wikipedia. Anyone want to start a miniproject makign series templates for large arcade series? I did it for pac-man yesterday.. My next one is gonna be for the Mortal Kombat games, and then for the SNK fighting games. Oh and everyone thanks for the enthusiasm :) --larsinio 22:08, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

I didn't see the "List of video games" at the bottom that was added. I don't think it needs to be there. — Frecklefoot | Talk 23:37, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

I added it because it was also included in the "video game industry" template (see a few section up on this talk page). I'll remove it then. Felsir 10:14, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Release Dates in Infobox - Preferred Format?

I've noticed that the user plaguing me on the Splatterhouse article continues to switch the info placed in the infobox regarding its release date. I initially had it listed as "November 1988" but he/she continues to switch it to "11/1988" and I am curious as to which format/instance is typically preferred/accepted? TheMonkofDestiny 23:48, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, my preference is to just have the year and no month, since release months differ from region to region (remember, Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia). But, if you insist on having a month, my preference is to have the month spelled out. One reason is that it's more legible: the user doesn't have to translate "11" into "November". Also, date formats are not universal: in some areas the preference would be for the year to come first. But I also think it looks better spelled out. After all, 11/1988 is just a sloppy abbreviation and should only be used where space is at a premium (not a problem here on the 'pedia). HTH — Frecklefoot | Talk 15:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

infobox category

There are a few arcade games in Category:Pages needing an infobox conversion that have been tagged with {{newinfobox}}. Someone should periodically check that category for any articles that fall under this project. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:42, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I've tagged a bunch more arcade games with {{newinfobox}}. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 01:28, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Articles for the Wikipedia 1.0 project

Hi, I'm a member of the Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using these criteria, and we are looking for A-class, B-class, and Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles? Please post your suggestions here. Thanks a lot! Gflores ^Talk 17:40, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Info

To get more information about the games, you can get FAQs, Walkthroughs, and Codes from www.gamefaqs.com 70.111.251.203 03:59, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Series boxes

I'd just like to get an opinion on something. On boxes that represent a series of games, such as the R-Type box, here:

Do people think the title looks better inside or outside the box? Personally, I hate it outside, but some boxes are done like this, so I thought someone might have a good reason for doing it. Spottedowl 11:47, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Titles in infobox images

Have we relaxed this policy? "It [the infobox image] should show gameplay, and not the title — the title does not help the user getting an impression of the game." R-Type and a few other games have recently been changed to show the title screen in the infobox. I think it kind of looks smarter, but I agree that gameplay should be shown. Some of the articles put a gameplay screenshot in the main body of the page, but doesn't that conflict with the 'one per page' rule of screenshots (whatever that is?) Spottedowl 12:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I am guilty of Ignoring all rules in this case and always use the title screen in the infobox; to me there is no other logical place to put it and I htink it suits the infobox. Similarliy should movies use a a screencap in their infoboxes instead of movie posters? Many console games use packaging art in their infoboxes instead of screenshots, which has led me to think that its oka to use the title screen. I think seeing the title screen does add some context ot the article and I would prfer to chnage this policy to stay inline with what other projects are doing. --Larsinio 14:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I assumed that the reason consoles used the box packaging rather than a screenshot is that screenshots are more difficult to take on modern consoles. Spottedowl 14:29, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

There are screenshots available on consoles, granted its not as easily accesible, but ive seen many articles (particular in the final fantasy series) that always use screen art as an infobox item. --Larsinio 14:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Golden Age FARC

Golden Age of Arcade Games has been nominated by Zzzzz to have its Featured Article status removed. Take a look at Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates and address any problems you can. Thanks! Pagrashtak 22:35, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Huh? It has been a featured article. Are they using a time machine to remove it from history? :) Spottedowl 01:18, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Joining in

Hey, I'm here to start helping out with anything arcade game-related. I spent a huge part of my youth (mid 80s - mid 90s) in arcades, and think I could very helpful. One thing I would like to see is an article focusing on the fighting game dominance of the arcades pretty much throughout the 90s. The golden age of arcade games article ends pretty much right where this period began (minues a few stagnant years), beginning with the explosive popularity of Street Fighter 2 in 1991. If not a fighting game-specific article, at least an article that deals with arcades in the 90s; there were other highly popular games during this time too. NBA Jam was huge, and this was also the time when sit-down racing games really started to become big draws (Virtua Racing 4-player setups, Cruis'n USA), to the point that racing games and Dance Dance Revolution are essentially the only draws today. Let me know what you think, I really want to write some discussion of this period, but I'd also like to get a consensus of where it should go first. Static3d 15:32, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I also added a new discussion to the Golden Age of Arcade Games talk page about possibly focusing that article specifically on the 1980s, so other pages could exist for the 1990s and 2000s. Static3d 16:12, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Talk page tag

I noticed that there isn't any talk page tag to show that an article is part of WikiProject Arcade Games. Would someone be able to create one? For example, the talk pages for Donkey Kong (arcade game), Congo Bongo and Gotcha (arcade game) currently have this tag: {{cvgproj}} This is inappropriate for Gotcha. The other two should have an arcade games tag as well. 156.34.215.142 14:57, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I can build one, it's not hard. I'll take a look at in a bit. — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:01, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. 156.34.216.161 20:11, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Have you made one yet? : ) Yummy32 15:26, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Is anyone still interested in this project?

I started this project eons ago (okay, not eons, but a couple of years ago). It initially had a great deal of interest and we made some great progress. Lately, however, a rumor has begun circulating that this project is dead or inactive. While the Talk page here seems pretty calm as of late, I wouldn't consider it dead. Does anyone else feel it is dead? Does anyone still care about this project? — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm still interested in the project. Unfortunately my personal life keeps me from contributing a lot lately. Felsir 17:35, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Same goes for me. --elias.hc 11:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Arcade flyers in Infobox CVG

From WP:CVG/T: Regarding the migration from the Arcade infobox to the CVG infobox, there's discussion at Talk:Final Fight regarding using arcade flyers as the infobox box image. Currently, CVG guidelines only state that cover art be used in the CVG infobox, not taking in account games that were released first and/or primarily as arcade titles. I don't believe arcade flyers can be used as a substitute for cover art - arcade flyers are essentially advertising for arcade games. It wouldn't make sense if someone used an advertisement to represent a console game, so it wouldn't make sense to use an arcade flyer for an arcade game.

The logical equivalent of cover art for an arcade title is the arcade's dedicated cabinet, but that wouldn't look so great for an infobox. I suppose we could use box art for one of the ports, just like we do for multiplatform games, but that would discount the fact that some titles were released in arcades first. --Jtalledo (talk) 00:47, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I think what we've been doing is fine. We decided that the title screen of an arcade game isn't a good representation of what the game actually looks like. We've been using a screenshot of gameplay, which is easily obtained with emulators like MAME. — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Killer List of Videogames

Similar to the WP:CVG we should have a template for KLOV links, shouldn't we? Or should there even be no links to klov at all? Because at first I kept adding a link to klov to pretty much any article and now I've pretty much gotten the feeling there's no valuable information for an encyclopedia on that site. Most of the times they've got screenshots - lots even (e.g. mslug5) but that's about it. Any opinion on this matter? --elias.hc 15:10, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

We should totally keep linking to the KLOV. They've got much more information on each game than we do. If it's not encyclopedic information, that's fine. A site we link to only has to have more information on a topic, it doesn't have to be encyclopedic. Encyclopedic information we can add to the article itself. Yes, we should keep linking to the KLOV for each arcade game article. — Frecklefoot | Talk 04:07, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay good, how about a template then? The links look like this: http://www.klov.com/game_detail.php?game_id=12904 and although some include letter=m for games starting with m etc. that's obsolete, only the game_id is necessary to locate the game on klov. The template could include a link to the article about klov, too. --elias.hc 13:14, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Integration with {{cvgproj}}

A request has been made at WikiProject Computer and video games talk to intergrate the subprojects' templates into the CVG header itself. The newly integrated template can be seen here: User:Hbdragon88/Temp. Although this project does not have a template, if any was ever created, it would be as a part of the cvg template. Thoughts? Objections? --PresN 15:56, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

No objection here. — Frecklefoot | Talk 19:02, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Project Directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:

• User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
• User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
• User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
• User:Badbilltucker/Science directory

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:16, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now put the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 00:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Stablepedia

Beginning cross-post.

See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 00:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

End cross-post. Please do not comment more in this section.

Central processing unit FAR

Central processing unit has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Sandy (Talk) 23:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 17:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Shortcut WP:AG has been nominated for Deletion

For discussion please see Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion#WP:AG_.E2.86.92_Wikipedia:WikiProject_Arcade_games Thanks,--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 06:09, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Based on the discussion, I'm retargeting WP:AG to Wikipedia:WikiProject Agriculture.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 19:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Inactivity

Lets try and get this project up and running again. I'm currently working on a article about Pacific novelty. Its so far been very difficult to find out much, any help would be appreciated. --Hybrid360 (talk) 18:57, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

This has probably been asked before, but how does this project differ from WikiProject Video games? — KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

This project mainly focuses on video arcade games, while the Video games WikiProject focuses on console video games and PC games. There is some history to this: originally, video games were defined on Wikipedia as "games played on a video game console", so the WikiProject was named the "Computer and video games WikiProject", which excluded arcade games. So I started this WikiProject to organize (video) arcade games. Eventually I, and several other Wikipedians, pointed out that video games are electronic games that use a video display as their main form of feedback, so that would include console video games and computer games and arcade games. However, while PC games and console games still get a lot of attention from the (now) Video games WikiProject, arcade video games are largely ignored. So this project does conceptually have some overlap with the VG WikiProject, it doesn't really in practice. Arcade games are video games, but few Wikipedians involved with the VG WP care much about arcade games. Hence, the separate project. But we do share an infobox, which has extra parameters for arcade games. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 11:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, okay. Might I suggest that we structure this project much the same way as WP:VG then? We can adopt the same practices and guidelines, use most of the same templates, etc. - the only major distinctions would be in the scope of the project. I haven't taken much time to read over the project right now, but it seemed to me that this project is in more of a draft state than the more popular WP:VG. That might be part of why it's seen as inactive. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

What practices and guidelines did you want to adopt? — Frecklefσσt | Talk 12:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Space Invaders

Hey, I heard this project is trying to get started up again. If there are some members interested, I've done a rewrite of Space Invaders and would appreciate a little help finishing it up. There are three main things left to do: finish up the "Re-releases and sequels" sections, maybe expand the "In popular culture" section, and rewrite the lead to reflect the new version. I left a lot of the older content (mainly sequel info and pop culture references) between hidden html tags at the very end of the article because I wasn't sure about some of it; specifically the music references. I figured if a couple of editors help out this it could easily smash through GAN, and after going through WP:PR, it'd stand a good chance of passing FAC. Any volunteers? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 04:13, 24 May 2008 (UTC))

What I saw of the rewrite look good, but I can't help with the effort. You might also want to ask at the Video game project. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 19:32, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

What would be neat is if all the arcade info was filled out in the infobox, as then we could use it as the example for the infobox. There's a free picture of the cabinet here., and we can only use free images in WP space. Where does said information exist? ~ JohnnyMrNinja 08:09, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Donkey Kong (video game) has a complete infobox and was kind of the template I followed for Space Invaders. Though, I would like Space Invaders to be complete also. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 20:43, 22 July 2008 (UTC))

I copied Donkey Kong (video game), but made a few changes (aside from the free image) because it didn't seem to use the fields available. Could someone take a look at the example here and tell me if I'm mistaken? ~ JohnnyMrNinja 01:30, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

It was mentioned above that this project was created because WP:CVG didn't cover arcade games. WP:CVG has been restructured, and now does support them. As this project is inactive, would any interested members approve of transitioning into a task force of WP:VG? This way the VG templates, categories, assessment scale, and other rescources can be fully used for this project, and it won't run the risk of MfD. It may also help revitalize interest. Thoughts? JohnnyMrNinja 20:41, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Anybody? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 20:27, 10 July 2008 (UTC))

It's been a week... Is there really that little interest in this project? I propose moving this project to Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Arcade and relabeling it the Arcade Task Force under WikiProject Video games. Anyone? JohnnyMrNinja 15:08, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Though I'm not a member, I think it's a good idea. As a task force, it would be easier to maintain interest without having to worry about the normal administrative tasks of a project. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC))

I think the move over to a taskforce is sound. As stated on that page, WP:VG covers arcade games just as much as console and computer games, so it makes sense for the Arcade Games section to operate as a task force rather than as a separate, overlapping project. We'd be duplicating effort to try to prop up this project with the same guidelines, administratrivia, etc. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 16:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe it'd be good to make it a task force under WP:VG, especially if it's not really that active and can benefit from being directly tied into the parent project.--十八 20:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

That's fine. Since WP:VG supports arcade games now, this WP is kind of redundant. Plus the WP:VG has many more members than this one ever did. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 12:36, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I count two of the active members agreeing to the move. Are the others aware of this discussion, or even still active? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 16:48, 16 July 2008 (UTC))

I think the consensus is pretty clear. I've moved the Project to a task force, and have begun adapting it as such. Any interested parties, please help my nip/tuck to Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Arcade. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 07:54, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Killer List of Videogames as a source

FYI- To those looking for sources for some of the older and more obscure arcade games, KLOV looks to have survived the Space Invaders FAC as a reliable source. Add to the fact it was also used in Donkey Kong (video game) (FA-Class). Hopefully this opens the door for more improvement to arcade game articles. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 17:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC))

Is there a list of arcade specific resources, or should we consider doing one for this group. It might be worthwhile to compile a listing of resources that can be promoted for use in FAC articles to also establish their reliability status. I know besides KLOV, system16 is a resources I often use for technical info for instance. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 18:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I didn't see any at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources. It wouldn't be a bad idea to add KLOV to that list. Is there anything to show reviewers the reliability of System16? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:27, 7 October 2008 (UTC))

File:Coleco Donkey Kong.png

Image:Coleco Donkey Kong.png has been nominated for deletion at WP:FFD

70.29.213.241 (talk) 06:31, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Time Gal

I recently did a rewrite of Time Gal, a laserdisc arcade game that is more well-known as a Mega-CD game. The development section is as good as I can get it, and I was wondering if anybody had any print sources that could expand on this rather obscure title? I feel I've already exhausted the web, and not sure if anything more is even out there. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 06:12, 30 May 2009 (UTC))

Sources anybody?

Stumbled across this page today while working on Q*bert. Content from a game's release is hard to come by, but these should alleviate that. Be sure to cite the content with {{Cite journal}} and not link to the website to avoid copyright violations (see Wikipedia talk:Copyrights#Scanned magazines). (Guyinblack25 ^talk 23:52, 31 May 2009 (UTC))

Wikipedia:WikiProject Pinball

WikiProject Video games is looking to clean up both inactive and limited-scope WikiProjects dealing with video games and move these into task forces of WikiProject Video games, as outlined at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Inactive project cleanup. This message is being posted to this task force to first see if this task force is currently active, and if so, if there is consensus to redirect the Pinball WikiProject to this task force, as it seems to fall under your scope. Please respond to let us know that you are indeed active and if WikiProject Pinball would fall under your scope. Thank you, MrKIA11 (talk) 14:49, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Like most of the task forces, there are editors interested, but not much activity in the way of collaboration.

Adding pinball to this taskforce's scope sounds reasonable. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 17:09, 10 November 2009 (UTC))

Killer List of Videogames (KLOV) - should this still be considered a reliable source ?

It is my understanding that the Killer List of Videogames is considered a reliable source on Wikipedia. While it is a good site unfortunately it doesn't seem to have been updated in several years and it definitely has incomplete and in some cases incorrect information. Given the current situation I would propose that the status of the KLOV be ascertained and possibly another site be found as an alternate reliable source. Asmpgmr (talk) 21:49, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

While I agree with some of your points, I don't know of another site that is nearly as comprehensive. MobyGames doesn't do arcade games and I don't know of a similar site. A lot of it's info is mostly correct, so I think it's the best we can do for now. If you know of another site--and from your post it doesn't sound like you do--we should keep using it for the time being. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 23:19, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Arcade History - http://www.arcade-history.com/ - personally I don't think the layout is as nice as KLOV but it does seem to be updated. I have noticed that some people believe it is unreliable. If this is the case then I would be curious to know why. I just did a quick check of both sites of arcade games which are known not to actually exist: Antarctic Adventure (a console-only game), Alice in Wonderland (for some reason it is believed that there is an English version of Namco's Marchen Maze, there's not), Tank III (not on any official Atari list or the SEC info database) and the infamous Polybius. KLOV lists all 4 non-existent arcade games while Arcade History only lists Polybius. Besides Arcade History I don't know of any other sites besides MAME databases which of course only covers games which have been dumped and emulated. Asmpgmr (talk) 00:01, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I just removed the unverifiable Powerpuff Girls entry from the List of arcade video games article. Clearly this was taken from the KLOV and is yet another bogus KLOV entry. Web searches turn up no evidence that such an arcade game by Konami or any other company ever existed and there are no pictures, videos or flyers of it either. KLOV should no longer be considered an authoritative source for arcade games, it is no longer updated and there are too many errors in its database now. Asmpgmr (talk) 18:58, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't go that far. Sure, KLOV has some bad entries in it, but no online resource is perfect. It's useful for the correct entries it has. I've found it an invaluable resource for years. Thanks for the correction! — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 22:44, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm noticing too many issues with the KLOV: there are many errors, games listed which don't exist and it's simply not updated anymore. Any info from KLOV needs to be verified against another source. Arcade History is updated and at this point seems to be more accurate than KLOV so at the very least it should be considered as a valid source of info for arcade games to be used along with KLOV. Asmpgmr (talk) 01:34, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I have no quarrel with that. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 06:28, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

What do you think about the creation of a template for the Arcade History database similar to what exists for the KLOV ? Asmpgmr (talk) 19:18, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I think that's a great idea. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 21:32, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

List of Atari arcade games

Hey, folks, I just finished up the List of Atari arcade games, a list that has been sorely lacking. Take a look and see if you find any omissions or errors. There are plenty of red-links, ripe for having articles written. Peace. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 22:55, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

New template for the Arcade History database

I've created Template:Arcade History which accesses entries on the Arcade History database. This template is analogous to Template:KLOV game and works the same way. Arcade game articles should probably link to both since the two databases complement each other. Asmpgmr (talk) 00:52, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Cool. Seems like there ought to be an article for the Arcade History database now. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 20:26, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Article structure guidelines

An issue has come up regarding arcade article guidelines - User_talk:Thibbs#Arcade_game_reception_section. Specifically the reception section and the discussion of ports of arcade games. I really think that an article about an arcade game should focus on the arcade game and not its ports. While it is OK to list what ports were made that should be all that is listed. Details about the ports, reviews of ports and the reception of the ports are not relevant since ports of arcade games prior to the late 1990s were always inferior to the arcade game since the console/home computer hardware was inferior to that of arcade games. Also many arcade games did not have ports and of course any unreleased prototype games certainly would not have ports. Apparently having a reception section is part of the overall video game article guidelines but arcade games are a special case and should have separate guidelines. While detailing the reception of the actual arcade games would be interesting, I would imagine that finding this information decades later would not be easy and therefore should not be a requirement. Besides this information would not apply to the more obscure arcade games and certainly not to unreleased prototypes. I really think the arcade game articles should have their own guidelines which can be generally applied and the focus should be on the actual arcade games and not their ports. Therefore I propose that a requirement be added that arcade game articles should focus on the arcade game and not its ports.

Another issue is that the input field in the VG infobox does not work. While this does not matter for console or home computer games which all use common controllers, this definitely matters for arcade games. Would it be possible to make this work or have a separate template for arcade games ? Asmpgmr (talk) 20:52, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

You should probably bring this up at the main project since this task force is seen by so few. But I don't think it will fly. Arcade games used to have their own template, but it was decided that they should use the main video game infobox template. I resisted at first, but eventually agreed it was a good move. A lot of my ideas for the arcade game infobox were adopted by the general video game template, and I'm convinced it was sufficient.

As for input parameter for arcade games, what makes it insufficient for arcade games? Yes, arcade games use a variety of controllers, but most are a variant of joystick, trackball, buttons, or a steering wheel. Why can't those go in the input parameter?

Lastly, I do think the arcade game articles should discuss ports. While it needn't go in depth on the ports, reception of the ports is acceptable. But it needn't be lengthy either. But if a port gained special notability in its own right, it is perfectly acceptable (and recommended) that it be discussed at more length in the article. But this is generally the exception and not the rule, especially for 1980s and 1990s games as you note.

Do you have some example articles that you find especially hard to fit into the current model? I'd like to see firsthand what you're struggling with. Thanks! — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 22:25, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

The input parameter is ignored. For example the Centipede and Millipede articles have the input parameter specified but nothing appears in the infobox. Asmpgmr (talk) 00:37, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, that's peculiar. It used to work. I'll see what I can find out. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 20:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the edit history for Template:Infobox_video_game it appears the input parameter was removed August 24, 2010 by MSGJ who based upon his edit history doesn't seem to be particularly concerned about video games. This really needs to be restored as it is certainly relevant for arcade games. Asmpgmr (talk) 03:24, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for an arcade game infobox template

Arcade games should have their own specific infobox. There is information to list which is applicable to arcade games but doesn't apply to console or home computer games and vice versa. With a separate infobox, changes to the VG infobox wouldn't affect arcade games and they could get rid of the last 6 fields which don't apply to console or home computer games.

Proposed:

{{Infobox Arcade Game
|title = 
|image = 
|caption = 
|developer = 
|distributor = 
|development staff = 
|released = 
|genre = 
|modes = 
|input = 
|cabinet = 
|arcade system = 
|cpu = 
|sound = 
|display = 
}}

Asmpgmr (talk) 16:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure this is a good idea. It sounds like it could lead to content forking because it suggests that articles covering games with arcade versions are to be strictly limited to the arcade versions. Many games have both arcade, home console, and PC versions so a general video game infobox sounds like the best solution to me. There is nothing specific to your proposed "Infobox Arcade Game" that couldn't just as easily be rendered in prose in the body of the article and frankly that would probably be less confusing for readers who might not know what a "twisty grip" or a "tank stick" is in the context of the version of the game they may be familiar with. -Thibbs (talk) 16:33, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I think having the infobox with this sort of common data available at a glance is very useful. Also I'm vehemently opposed to any sort of dumbing down. Asmpgmr (talk) 16:58, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Explaining in prose (if it's done with intelligence) doesn't have to be "dumbing down". -Thibbs (talk) 17:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Excuse me ? Done with intelligence ? I've written numerous video game emulators and know more about this subject than you. I don't appreciate that comment at all. I've really had enough of you. Asmpgmr (talk) 17:17, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Please calm down. That wasn't a comment on your intelligence. What I am saying is explaining the inputs of an arcade game in prose isn't always a "dumbing down" if it is done with skill. There are ways to make it read as a dumbed down article, but if it is finessed then you can make it read like a clear and insightful explanation. Honestly I'm certain that you could handle it because I do not think you lack intelligence in the least. -Thibbs (talk) 17:22, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Please go away already. I have no interest in your subjective, non-technical and uninformed POV. Such a point of view doesn't help an online encyclopedia which should be based in objective factual information whatsoever. Asmpgmr (talk) 17:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

By way of an analogy, let's look at PlayStation games. The PlayStation systems are designed with backward compatibility as one of their selling points. In other words, PS1 games often run on a PS2 and both PS1 and PS2 games often run on PS3. There are, however, some games that were unable to make the transition from PS1 to PS2 and are restricted to the original PS1 platform. Similarly there are a number of games that are incompatible with the PS3. This is a big issue for these games because it often proves to be the deciding factor in their long-term viability and legacy, and it is important information to those who wish to put the game into temporal context. You could imagine a proposal for an "Infobox PlayStation Game" template where PS2 and PS3 backward compatibility are listed as an infobox field. The problem is that this information is specific to one particular version of the game and not to all versions so we would be creating a fork. Similarly it would be unwise to create separate templates for PC and Nintendo systems. Before long we would be looking at separate articles with separate specific infoboxes for each version of every game. The prose solution is much simpler and I think clearer for readers. -Thibbs (talk) 18:28, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

That's not an analogy, that's simply a non-technical POV. Anyway why do I have to repeat myself. I do not want to engage with you any further and will no longer answer any of your posts anywhere. You have become as frustrating as the user who ludicrously argued that DOS is a multitasking OS. For the sake of civility please do not continue to bother me. Asmpgmr (talk) 19:48, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Questionable arcade system board articles

• Namco Galaxian
• Namco Pac-Man
• Namco Galaga
• Namco Pole Position
• Namco Super Pac-Man
• Namco Phozon
• Namco Libble Rabble
• Namco Pac-Land

Why do these articles exist ? I realize that this information comes from System 16 and that information is based upon the listed games being in the same MAME drivers (except for Pac-Man and Rally-X which are separate drivers) but these are not true system boards like Namco System 1. I really don't think that Namco considers these actual arcade system boards. In most cases there are significant hardware differences between the games listed, for example Pac-Man and Rally-X have different memory maps and videos systems. All of the games listed in the "Namco Galaga" have different video systems, etc. Should these articles be deleted for technical inaccuracy ? Asmpgmr (talk) 16:53, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Reception sections

Hello, there is currently a discussion ongoing at WT:VG concerning whether or not articles on arcade games should have reception sections and, if so, whether these reception sections should cover only the original game or whether they may also cover reception of remake versions. The discussion can be found here. Please help us form a consensus on this by sharing your views. Thanks. -Thibbs (talk) 17:12, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Platform(s) in the Infobox

I am interested in introducing a change to what seems to be an unstated convention for arcade game articles. The change has to do with the use of the "platforms" field in "Infobox VG". Currently the text at Template:Infobox VG as well as the name of the field and the way it renders in the in-article infoboxes indicates that multiple platforms are expected if the game was released for more than just one. At the Style section of WP:VG/MOS, other indirect suggestions can be found (e.g. "When filling out the infobox for a multi-platform game, the platforms in the platform field should be listed in chronological order") that listing multiple platforms when pertinent is expected to be part of drafting all video game articles.

I understand that for classic arcade game articles it can be kind of messy and distracting to put in a giant list all of the half-assed ports and remakes the game has ever seen because due to their classic nature (i.e. both old and good) there are bound to be many more ports/remakes for these articles than for other WP:VG articles. And for this kind of article I think it is natural and fitting that the emphasis should be on the arcade version which was the original reason it became popular in the first place. So I'd like to change the convention by introducing something I've seen at a few arcade game articles that I think serves the purposes of the article while still adhering to WP:VG/MOS and the natural interpretations one would draw from "Template:Infobox VG".

The solution I propose is to add the word "Various" after the word "Arcade" when filling in the "platforms" field from now on. The word "Various" would then be internally linked to the section of the article that covers the ports, remakes, and rereleases. (An example of this solution implemented in an article can currently be found at Galaga). By using the word "various" instead of listing all of the ports and remakes we avoid messy bloat and we maintain the article's emphasis on arcade games while still listing all platforms as suggested by the WP:VG guidelines. If this sounds like a good idea to everyone then I'd like to modify the Donkey Kong infobox used as an example at WP:VG/Arcade#Infobox (and of course it would be modified in the article as well). Perhaps a brief explanation of the way that field is to be used for arcade game articles could be included as well if needed. So does this sound like a good idea? -Thibbs (talk) 15:07, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Seeing no objections I've made the alteration(s). -Thibbs (talk) 14:51, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Merge this task force

I've proposed a comprehensive cleanup of WP:VG's inactive task forces (which would include merging this task force into the "retrogaming" task force), if you'll take a look czar ♔ 02:04, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't oppose this. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 13:40, 6 May 2014 (UTC)