Talk:Magnetic Scrolls

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Jackpot World (1 participant)
Bejeweled Stars (5 participants)
Melee (game terminology) (5 participants)
Godzilla: Monster of Monsters (4 participants; relisted)
Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (4 participants; relisted)
Crazy Bus (13 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Emulator

I think something needs to be mentioned about the fact MS wanted their games to run on many computer types, so they wrote a 68K cpu emulator (since Pawn ran on the Sinclar QL, which was a 68K machine), and was one of the first 'cpu emulators' in software. So the PC, c64 etc, were running the native 68k versions.

Wonderland is a DOS game, not a windows game

Wonderland has its own windowing system. It runs in MS DOS and has nothing to do with Microsoft Windows. The corresponding passage in the text should be removed. It is false and misleading. --217.232.225.86 (talk) 12:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderland published by Virgin Mastertronic

I actually have the manual in front of me. It was most definitely published after the merge by Virgin Mastertronic. Am updating the page to say as much. 86.165.222.85 (talk) 19:22, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sierra's competing adventure games

Previous text describe the competing games of the mid-'80s developed by Sierra On-Line as "light-hearted point-and-click" adventures. Sierra released no games controlled by a mouse-driven point-and-click interface prior to 1990's King's Quest 5 -- prior to that all of their games used text parser interfaces, with a few menu-driven exceptions such as The Black Cauldron. Further, many of their games were arguably quite serious in tone, e.g. the Police Quest series. I'm changing this description to instead refer the Sierra's specialization in contrast to the text adventures describe previously in the paragraph: Sierra pioneered the use of graphics in lieu of text descriptions in their games. 2601:586:8101:387A:21F:E2FF:FE07:8992 (talk) 00:57, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Grueslayer

Let's talk. 07:57, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Magnetic Scrolls. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080609072617/http://www.mschronicles.com/ to http://www.mschronicles.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:53, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Source

Merge from The Magnetic Scrolls Collection

MERGE

Consensus to merge the article due to duplicative content. While Grueslayer stated that the article should be improved, they made no attempt to improve the article in the intervening time. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:16, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I should note that the move of this article to mainspace is a blatant, disruptive attempt to bypass the WP:AFC process. But since the article does not fail GNG I am more than happy to get consensus that this article should be merged. It is a compilation of 3 games that already have articles; the only thing different is that it has an alternate control method that is not text-based. The information and critical reception can easily be explained in the parent article or the ones for the individual games. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:13, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While much of the information of that article can be explained in the parent article, I don't see why it needs to. We're not short on articles on collections of works of literature. During a quick search I stumbled across Dream Cycle and Reader's Digest Condensed Books. We're not short on articles on game collections either, see Category:Video game compilations. The provided reception references are about the compilation and the quality of the games compared to the others, not about the individual games. So, no. Rather invest your time into expanding the article, for it is short yet. Kind regards, Grueslayer 12:46, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See also WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, pointing to a category full of really sketchy articles does not an encyclopedic article make. Lovecraft's Dream Cycle is a deep interlinked universe of lore rather than a few games in a combo pack. Collections such as The Forgotten Realms Archives and Raiden Fighters Aces don't really seem much better. If there is a significant degree of development info specifically concerning the compilation then I would probably change my opinion, but the article presented in AfC did not have that, just a few sentences of summary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:19, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Largely duplicative content with no strong showing for independent notability. Merge and cover within existing context. czar 16:12, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.