Wikipedia page on wesnoth

[multilis]

Provides some info on wesnoth. Have updated entries to reflect "core" values of developers in dev section, and how 1.6 is called "obsolete". (Fair that everyone gets both good and bad on encyclopedia page).

If my info is *inaccurate*, feel free to correct, but if simply you don't like the source (in game chat with a developer), note that much of wesnoth entry has *no* supporting references, so correct that first.

Could use some work, eg that leveling (with healing) is also a core value according to lead developer Dave, but in contrast is allowed to be flexibly adjusted.

For background, patches have been developed that allow slider bar adjustment to amount of luck similar to how leveling can be adjusted (or turned off for conquest), but only way to get these as a *choice* would be to fork to new game. It is debated how many users would like to have an option, and so far no survey has been done and may not be permitted in this forum.

(The other issue is the basically gray area whether 1.6 is obsolete or not)

[Pentarctagon]

thats really a low blow imo

[multilis]

thats really a low blow imo

I gave the guy I chatted with option to object to being quoted.

IMO Wikipedia should be unbiased, show both pros and cons of every game, person, etc. Imagine for example only good stuff was put about Obama or George Bush or MS Word. Not giving a secret but what devs openly say and believe and have no problem with and feel that 100% of companies work like.

If you can't openly talk about what is a possible flaw, (eg PDF support in MS office was most requested feature for 10+ years), then improvements can't be made, one way or another.

Other companies use that info to evaluate for example which projects to fund, which companies fit their value system including supporting wesnoth.

I saw how a certain game (master of orion 3) ended up with "core" values that were out of sync with much of their audience.

[ParadiseCity]

IMO Wikipedia should be unbiased ...

Information isn't biased, only the people that supply it are.

**Edited to include (and then move) a comma**

[Pentarctagon]

unbiased is not the same as intentionally referencing a supposed flaw just to make the wesnoth devs look aloof and unresponsive to community input when it is in fact quite the opposite.

[ivanovic]

Oh, wow, lovely. What a problem do some people have all the time with the system of "core concepts". One core concepts of Wesnoth is that it is completely and 100% based on randomness. Yes, there are some add-ons working around this. If you prefer this, just do it. If you want to have a complete way for configuring randomness, fork the game. Reason: it would no longer be Wesnoth. How would this work? Would a player not be surprised if randomness was gone from singleplayer campaigns? How would it work with multiplayer campaigns? Or is this only an option for multiplayer skirmish games? You know, inconsistency here would really suck for players. It is a lot better and easier to stay with a simple theme:
Basically everything in Wesnoth depends on randomness! This is one of the core concepts that will not change.
If you don't like randomness, you should either not be playing Wesnoth or start your own game project (or simply fork Wesnoth) and make it "better" than Wesnoth. You are 100% free to do so, noone of us is going to stop you. Since you used some strange comparisons in the chatlog, what about this one: Try to propose to Linus to switch to a microkernel design instead of the current monolithic design for the Linux kernel. Yes, it is of a comparable dimension.

[Sangel]

Huh? Quibbles over random number generation are not appropriate matter for a Wikipedia entry. Massive flame wars rage constantly over issues of balance in mainstream games such as Starcraft or World of Warcraft, but that doesn't make them worth mention in an encyclopaedia article.

Wikipedia is not a Battleground. Importing disputes over game mechanics is not appropriate.

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

Note that someone has undone the OP changes as having an inappropriate tone, which is one editorial decision that I actually agree with, as I read those changes and they did have a very negative, even accusatory tone.

Anyhow, all that stuff is gone now, so no worries.

[Zarel]

Yeah, pretty much. Wikipedia may unbiased, but it also has some minimum level of notability requirements - not every criticism ever leveled against Wesnoth should be there, just like "George Bush once accidentally said 'is' when he meant to say 'are' " doesn't really belong in the article on George Bush.

The article should mention that many players dislike Wesnoth because of its dependence on randomness, but I can't think of any other criticisms that are notable enough for inclusion in a Wikipedia article.

Also: Gosh, you could have at least linked to the article in question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Battle_for_Wesnoth

[Gambit]

If you do that can you pop into every other game real quick and point out what the minority dislikes about it?
Thanks. It's a big help to keep wikipedia informationally complete like that. History will need to know that a handful of individuals dislike the amount of luck involved in Wesnoth.

I, and many others, didn't like Mad Maestro because it had a lot of music in it. It's a possible flaw. I actually emailed the producers, but they refused to change it. I even offered to make a less music patch, but they refused to include it.

[TheHouseJackBuilt]

Why on earth should wiki page state something becacuse some people might consider it a "drawback"?
Commercial games that u actually pay money to buy wont even bother pointing out real drawbacks, not something that is subjective.

And lets say someone got tricked (lol) into downloading wesnoth and found out that he doesnt like the randomness in it. What exactly did that someone lost? The game is free. Even if it had only two factions with two units each faction no server and no campaigns its still free.

And the game is even better than take it or leave it. Its take it leave it or alter it into any way u want.

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

All you would really have to do is state that the game determines hits based on a random roll compared to defensive states, or something like it. Completely neutral yet still stated the factual use of randomness.

And our friend keeps re-adding his changes, only for them to be reverted minutes later. About five time since the last time I've posted. I'm sensing someone's about to be banned from editing wikipedia.

[Zarel]

If you do that can you pop into every other game real quick and point out what the minority dislikes about it?
Thanks. It's a big help to keep wikipedia informationally complete like that. History will need to know that a handful of individuals dislike the amount of luck involved in Wesnoth.

You know, your posts are so trolly sometimes.

Wikipedia always shows criticism of games... generally in the "Reception" section.

'Meer remarked though, that Supreme Commander "feels like hard work", and that with the emphasis on epic scale, details are overlooked.'

'Various portions of [Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2's] campaign have caused some controversy in certain communities. The depiction of a massacre carried out in a Russian airport has caused anger in the international community.'

etc etc. Why should Wesnoth be immune?

Why on earth should wiki page state something becacuse some people might consider it a "drawback"?
Commercial games that u actually pay money to buy wont even bother pointing out real drawbacks, not something that is subjective.

I'm suggesting pointing out its drawbacks on Wikipedia (where the drawbacks to commercial games are also pointed out). not suggesting pointing out its drawbacks on the Wesnoth site (although it would also be a good idea - would decrease the number of people complaining if you clearly pointed out "this is what the game is like, and here's why we're not changing it").

And our friend keeps re-adding his changes, only for them to be reverted minutes later. About five time since the last time I've posted. I'm sensing someone's about to be banned from editing wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:78.55.79.182

Already did. Apparently he hadn't heard of the 3RR.

[Gambit]

'Meer remarked though, that Supreme Commander "feels like hard work", and that with the emphasis on epic scale, details are overlooked.'

'Various portions of [Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2's] campaign have caused some controversy in certain communities. The depiction of a massacre carried out in a Russian airport has caused anger in the international community.'

1. Actual game critic.
2. Press
Even a vast majority of players would be acceptable as a number 3. (Like no lean in MW2)
People who dislike luck in wesnoth, and music in mad maestro are a drop in the bucket.

You'll turn off a bunch of people. Anything other than "Very very few people who play Wesnoth dislike the amount of luck involved." would be a massive overstatement. And to say "very very few"... well that just isn't even worth mentioning at that point it's so tiny.


Also, did you get a new freaking IP address OP? It's back even after the 3RR ban -_-

[TheHouseJackBuilt]

I'm suggesting pointing out its drawbacks on Wikipedia (where the drawbacks to commercial games are also pointed out). not suggesting pointing out its drawbacks on the Wesnoth site (although it would also be a good idea - would decrease the number of people complaining if you clearly pointed out "this is what the game is like, and here's why we're not changing it").

Even if wiki pages do that those are written from players. Its not like any commercial game's creators will put on any page (wiki or not) any drawbacks themselves. So why would that be expected from a free game about something especially when its not even considered a drawback except from some users?

Anyway my main point against something like this is that no matter how well it will be phrased it could "scare" away some players that may not have a problem with the system like it is giving them the impression that rng has a much greater effect on the game from what it actually has. And since the game is free i see no harm in some people downloading the game and then uninstalling it compared to some people not downloading it at all when a portion of them would have liked the game.

True it could reduce complaining posts.