My work is in the first, second and fifth paragraphs and in the new Customization subsection. I updated the checklist. I hope you don't find it too tedious to go through my numerous edit summaries. I think the first five paragraphs are in good shape (once we finish adding the material in the checklist). I think both the Customization and Multiplayer subsections should be about half the size of the lead subsection.
First paragraph of Customization section is stuff that can be done before game without using scenario or text editing, second paragraph is stuff that can be done through the scenario or map editor and third paragraph is stuff that requires text editor (custom factions and alphax.txt editing.
First paragraph of Multiplayer is introduction to multiplaying and hot-seat or PBEM multiplayer (like single player). Second paragraph is existing paragraph on simultaneous multiplaying.
How does this sound. I hope you agree that this already looks a lot better than the existing version without going into game cruft. Vyeh (talk) 11:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Edit summaries?? I've gone through every diff we've done sice June! :) It looks fantastic so far. A couple more minor additions, and we can move it into the article and wikify and source it. Again though, you know a heck of a lot more then I do about the inner parts of the game. I never played multiplayer, or customized the game to any large extent. I know next to nothing about that stuff. Nolelover12:40, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I meant that I kept going over and over those sentences for factions, tweaking them. Then I would read them and find a few more words to improve. Sourcing shouldn't be difficult. I have been consulting the manual. Take a look at what is in the Plot section. Factions are a natural transition out of Characters. And we will be able to transition native life out of it. (We will probably want to make some sort of linkage (a couple of words) from the Ascent to Transcendence victory condition to the end of the Story section, e.g. "the Ascent to Transcendence secret project (concluding the storyline)" or some such. Vyeh (talk) 13:50, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I went through and completed the checklist. Then I went through the table of contents of the manuals to see if there are any major topics that should get a couple of words. Or at least we should consider it. (E.g. "exploration may uncover landmarks providing bonus resources and Unity pods providing both benefits and disasters"; "as an alien planet, Chiron is subject to random natural phenomena and ecological consequences for excessive development and industrialization"; "players may allocate energy to researching new technology, keeping the population from rioting, building units, facilities and secret projects, upgrading obsolete units, probe team actions, bribing other faction leaders, maintaining facilities and winning the game by cornering the Global Energy Market"). I know we want to avoid cruft, but we need to give enough detail so the general reader appreciates the complexity of the game's design and why the game won so many awards. Could you look at pages119-122 of the SMAC manual (there is a PDF file available - link is in the reference to the manual)? I think if you look at the first sentence of each section, it might help to sharpen the technology paragraph. Vyeh (talk) 19:09, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Since I had a general idea of how to incorporate the five general concepts, I went ahead and made a rough edit. I also trimmed the technology discussion considerably, although I think the manual pages I cite will give it another sentence or two. I did flip though the pages of the manuals and I think we have covered everything. A little polishing and maybe we should ask Guyinblack25 to look at it before we wikify and source it (it will save time). What do you think? Vyeh (talk) 19:34, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and put in the material from pp. 119-122. At this point, I think we need to go through and cut out any cruft that crept in. Vyeh (talk) 19:53, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I wasn't here to help. It does look good though. I think we're almost done with Gameplay. Has GuyinBlack said anything about Copy-editing it? Nolelover00:13, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I went ahead is because you had warned me that you were busy. I haven't asked Guyinblack25. I was waiting for you to read through and make some more edits. It occurred to me that I can get some non WP people who are familiar with gameplay to look at it. Do you have any problems if I posted some forum notices linking to your sandbox? I will tell them that since it is a sandbox, they should only put comments in the talk page or they can comment in the forum thread. This would get people who are familiar with gameplay to look at it. (I'll also say the length is right and that any additions have to be balanced by deletions.) Let me know. Vyeh (talk) 12:01, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
More hits for my little section of WP? Of course! :) That's fine. We'll get some new (expert?) eyes on it, see what they tell us. Post me a link to the forum. Nolelover18:01, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am starting with Kilkakon whom I helped out with his mod. Here is my message in the Custom factions balance questions thread. I plan to send a private message to Petek, who helps people with technical issues and is very knowledgeable about the game. After those two have a chance to respond and we have incorporated their suggestions, I may post in other forums. Ill provide links if I do. Vyeh (talk) 21:06, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Kilkakon responded. I've reproduced his comments here and in the checklist for our convenience. These comments are very valuable, in particular the comment about energy being used to build being the secondary method.
"SMAC is a turn-based strategy god game conducted from the third-person, isometric perspective."
"god game" is a weasel term. It's probably not needed if one mentions the third-person, isometric perspective.
"While factions receives different bonuses and penalties encouraging strategies related to their ideologies, the player may deviate from those strategies to expand and to fight other factions."
Wonders in Civ 2 were known as Wonders of the World.
"...players may also win by controlling three quarters of the total population..."
"...which determines a 3/4 population victory (winning by population)..."
If this is Diplomatic, then I'm not sure if it this generates the correct idea. This implies a Dominance victory (ala Civ 4).
"The main map (see the image on the right) is the playing surface, where players establishes bases, explore territory and move units."
Grammar: players establish
"...winning options."
I would use strategies instead of options here.
"Diplomacy introduces the element of cooperation, which is missing in many strategy games that focuses solely on the fighting aspects."
Grammar: strategy games that focus
"Energy reserves allow a player to build units, facilities and secret projects"
Perhaps clarify that using energy is a non-standard way to build, as in normally minerals are what do the producing of stuff.
"Although SMAC is complicated, the Datalinks, voiced by Robert Levy and Katherine Ferguson, provide information on everything in the game, including the Technology tree, which displays what technologies lead to which faction and unit upgrades and the more advanced technologies that can be unlocked."
This probably should be a new paragraph rather than running into the previous one.
"SMAC comes with ten pre-designed scenarios. Three are scenarios."
10 or 3?
"SMAC introduces direct player-to-player negotiation to multiplayer games, which also includes the player-to-computer diplomacy present in previous Civilization games."
Player-to-computer diplomacy in single player probably would make more sense.
"solitaire play"
"Solitaire play" is a weasel term. I don't know what it even means! :lol:
Obviously there are also a lot of places were links should be placed. There's the possibility of mentioning that the diplomacy text is a lot nicer than Civ, although that's only something that I find really awesome. :) I've ignored American spelling which mades me groan but hey Wikipedia is American anyway. :rolleyes:
I am not sure what you mean. It is good to have someone very familiar with the game read the section. In addition to Kilkakon, I have also sent a private message to Petek. Once we have gone through this round, maybe we should ask someone like Reyk, Narthring or Feyre, who don't seem to be affiliated with VG WP or expressed any particular knowledge of the game to read the section from the perspective of someone unfamiliar with the game. As you can see, I have already checked off the easiest comments, leaving only four for us to work with. Vyeh (talk) 16:07, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here are a few ideas for how to organize articles. These ... are no more than suggestions. Do not try to conform to them if they are not helping to improve the article.
For games:
...
Gameplay: going over the significant parts of how the game works. Remember not to include player's guide or walkthrough material. The gameplay section should come before the plot section, with the exception of when it would help to simplify the discussion of either section. For example, in Assassin's Creed, the player plays the role of a man in the 21st century experiencing the memories of a long-distant ancestor in the Crusades, with several gameplay elements in place to reflect this double-perception. In this case, describing the plot before the gameplay simplifies the content of each, avoiding repetition between sections.
Provide a general overview of game mechanics so general readers can understand other sections of the article.
Explain prominent features that make the game unique.
Gameplay sections should give a high level overview of the game's mechanics from the standpoint of someone that has never and may never play the game. To approach this, gameplay sections should be written assuming the reader may know general concepts of video games, but will not be familiar with the field. Only top-level details of gameplay should be provided to establish enough of how the game is played so further discussion in the Development and Reception sections can be understood. However, Wikipedia is not a game guide—gameplay and other similar sections of a game article should not include lists of in-game elements The article can mention such features are available in the game, and specific instances can be called out if there is specific coverage of those elements from reliable sources.
This section should mainly describe what the gameplay is. While it is acceptable to include a brief explanation of why the gameplay was implemented a certain way, such content is meant to be discussed in the "Development" section. Any mention of such content should be as brief as possible and the practice should be minimized to keep information organized.
The gameplay section should be sourced with references. While the game manual is generally acceptable, most modern review articles highlight key features of gameplay, which can be used for sourcing as well. These reviews may also help focus on certain aspects of the gameplay that should be discussed; a feature of the game that is never discussed by reviewers may not be necessary to include within the gameplay. For games that are part of a series, consider moving the gameplay discussion to a common "series" article. There should still be a brief summary of the gameplay within each game, including any changes from the general series gameplay, but it is not necessary to repeat all the details.
Things to remember
It is best to not include lists of levels, maps, vehicles, characters, monsters, items, weapons, power-ups, secrets, and the like.
The genre(s) of a game should always be listed and wikilinked in the first sentence of the first paragraph to establish the general frame of the game.
While the basic mechanics of the genre(s) should be summarized, the gameplay should focus on what makes the game different, unique, or an improvement on the basic genre(s).
Wikilink to basic gaming terms whenever possible, such as Game Over, New Game Plus, and Boss (video games); however, avoid replacing clear text with video game jargon that may not be clearly understood without following the wikilink.
Avoid the use of any abbreviations such as "RPG", "RTS", "NPC" and so forth; it is appropriate if such terms are used throughout the discussion, to spell out the term fully and then use the abbreviation. For example "Final Fantasy" is a turn-based computer role-playing game (RPG). The game established many of the trends seen in modern RPGs today.
Wikipedia is notGameFAQs, nor is it intended to function in a similar manner.
It is often better to re-read the game's manual to figure out how best to describe a difficult gameplay topic, even if you have played the game and believe you can explain it, the manual may be able to explain it in simpler terms. The manual may also provide suggestions for terminology to use to avoid confusion.
Murder on the Orient Express is a point-and-click adventure game, played from a third-person perspective. A player can navigate and interact with the game's environment, mainly carriages on the Orient Express, through use of a context-sensitive cursor. The cursor changes when it is placed over an item with which the player can interact, and can be used to talk to other characters, listen to other characters' conversations, look around the environment, and move. The player can walk to a location with a single click, and run to a location with a double-click. Double-clicking on the edge of the screen instantly takes the player to the next screen. There is a map of the train in the game's interface at the top of the screen, and once each carriage has been unlocked, the player can click on any part of the map and instantly be transported to that location, saving the player from having to travel through the train screen by screen. Another accessible feature is an objectives menu interface which states the general tasks the player should be attempting to complete. This menu is designed to guide players in the right direction without giving any explicit hints.
Murder on the Orient Express, as with its predecessor, features an inventory system. There are several components of the inventory, including a fingerprint examination screen, a scrapbook, and a passport screen for managing and viewing the passengers' passports. There are a total of eighty slots for carrying items in the inventory, spread across five separate screens. Items cannot be discarded from the inventory once they have been acquired. The player can access the inventory by clicking on an icon on the game's interface, or can simply right-click. After items are used, a right-click returns them to the inventory, and the exact slot they were originally placed in. Each item is labelled, and the player can inspect each inventory item in more detail by dragging it over a magnifying glass icon, and can also listen for a soft hissing sound which indicates that there is something relevant for the player to note about a certain item. In a divergence from other games in its genre, Murder on the Orient Express does not allow the player to combine items in the main inventory screen. There is a separate interface for item combinations, and the player must drag items into this screen if they wish to try and combine them...
Not so good example
Breakdown of section
The indention for the weapons list is not intuitive to read and inhibits the flow of the article.
Most every weapon in the game is mentioned; gives too much detail.
Grammar issues are present.
The entire section could be summarized in 1–2 sentences.
Note: the information here was later integrated into the rest of the "Gameplay" section of the article, and the "Weapons" section was completely removed. Information on the general types of weapons are still mentioned elsewhere as there is a source that cites where they draw their influence.
The Imperial Regalia of Japan are used as weapons in the game:
• The Reflector (or mirror) serves as a melee weapon with a mid attack rate and reach. Equipped as a sub-weapon, it also functions as a shield to block and counterattack enemies.
Reflectors include: Divine Retribution, Snarling Beast, Infinity Judge, Trinity Mirror and Solar Flare.
• The Rosaries (or beads) can be strung together as a whip-like melee weapon capable of inflicting rapid hits; when equipped as a sub-weapon, the individual beads can be shot out as individual or shotgun-like projectiles that automatically aim. Has the longest reach of all the weapons.
Rosaries include: Devout Beads, Life Beads, Exorcism Beads, Resurrection Beads and Tundra Beads.
• The Glaive (or sword) is also a melee weapon, slow to attack but each hit can be separately charged up to inflict heavy damage; used for a slam-down slash when used in air. Equipped as a sub-weapon, it can be used for a stabbing/thrust attack while on the ground, or lunging/diving attacks when used in air.
Glaives include: Tsumugari, Seven Strike, Blade of Kusanagi, Eighth Wonder, and Thunder Edge.
There are five weapons of each type in the game, each type differing in its basic attack power, its use as a sub-weapon, and how it interacts with Amaterasu's Celestial Brush; for example, the most powerful of each weapon carries an elemental power which Amaterasu can extract to inflict damage upon enemies. These include fire (Solar Flare, which is obtained from Itegami), ice (Tundra Beads, which can be bought from the Celestial Being named Marco on the Ark of Yamato, and from the weapons merchant in Sei-an City after the events at Wawku Shrine), and lightning (Thunder Edge, which you obtain after defeating the True Orochi).
I think I am done for this round (except tweaking). As I said on Guyinblack25's page, I am happy with structure, flow and length. I would suggest that you just read it through rather than go through my edits (other than reading the summaries to get a general idea of my thought process). Although the fourth paragraph may look like cruft, I think it is important to mention the different native life, monoliths, artifacts, landmarks, random events and ecology to convey the science fiction aspects (the first three paragraphs conveyed the Civilization aspects). Since the length of the gameplay section is now shorter than the plot and development sections, we are in good shape. Once we put in the sources (which will be easy for me) and wikify it, we can put the section into the article. Vyeh (talk) 17:12, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
...is a third person game (conducted?) from the third person. I think we need a verb there.
...with many ("of its"? or maybe "game"?) elements renamed... I'm not sure what you've said on that one, as I haven't read all the commentary.
"...and conquer other factions (civilizations). In addition to eliminating all non-allied factions..." We need a transition there. Maybe "and conquer other factions to achieve victory."
"conduct combat." Awkward.Nevermind
"The map is divided into map squares, which affect movement, combat and resources and which players may modify through terraforming." Awkward, because "which affect movement" looks like a parenthetical phrase, and then there's another "which". Could we break it up?
"and cornering the Global Energy Market" Again, a little awkward.See below
"Starting from initial ideologically-based". Can we change that to "Starting with"? Maybe get a synonym for the second "bases and penalties"?
In the third paragraph, we say "players use" three times in a row.
"SMAC also incorporates "space-based" That "also" is kind of coming out of nowhere. We can flip the sentence around, that might fix it.
"scenario and map editing and plain text file editing" I can't stand using the same verb twice in sentences. Can we change the second usage to "modification"?
Last paragraph: The last sentences are a bit choppy.
"the modification of SMAC's plain text game files" Is "plain" needed?
"which increases gaming options, and the economy, which supports unit upgrades," I'm not sure "economy" is the best word. Either way, it needs to agree with "cornering the...Market." Nolelover19:36, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Points 8 and 11 remain. I copied your comments into the checklist and went through the remaining points and your edits from yesterday. Vyeh (talk) 23:18, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have finished responding to your third round comments. In addition, I have tried to increase the use of transitions between paragraphs and the coherence of each paragraph. Vyeh (talk) 15:50, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nolelover, I substituted the New Gameplay section for the Gameplay section in the article. Before I made the substitution, I went through the old Gameplay section and transferred the footnotes and wikilinks (you had already done most of this). My objective was to preserve the sources I did not know (because there might be additional information). In some cases, where a sentence that was sourced was eliminated, I moved the footnote to a related sentence. You should note that some external links in the body (which I have learned since I wrote the original modification paragraph is not permitted) have been dropped. Obviously, not a problem for the links I supplied in the trial sentences for Eponymous (the current paragraph is much better), but a fan forum did add their own link next to those. Besides being an improvement to the old Gameplay section, the New Gameplay section will be easier to edit (particularly in adding footnotes). Vyeh (talk) 15:48, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
