From StrategyWiki, the video game walkthrough and strategy guide wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to all users! This page is where you can ask StrategyWiki-related questions to the staff and senior community figures, and they will do their best to answer. If you want to raise a topic for discussion (rather than just ask about it), please use the community issues forum instead. New issues are entered here, with the most recent at the bottom of the page. If your question does not pertain to editing StrategyWiki (e.g. asking for hints or game-specific information), please ask on the guide's talk page or on the forums.

Please review the Table of Contents to see if your issue has already been raised; also check the archives (to the right) in case it was discussed some time ago.

To facilitate ease of browsing and replying, please:

  1. Place your question at the bottom of the list.
  2. Title the question (by placing the title between equals signs: ==Title==).
  3. Sign your name and date (by adding four tildes: ~~~~).

Remove PC system requirements[edit]

I'd like to suggest we remove all pc game requirements from our infoboxes. Essentially every instance of {{pcreq}} (almost 400 uses). The template is inflexible and needs updating over time as computing power increases, and often the template isn't used (properly). The information doesn't help users play the game or find new games to play. It's not frequently updated by users anymore, and Steam covers all this information more directly/accurately. PCGW also covers it much better than we do if it's something a user needs. -- Prod (talk) 13:09, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm in favor of removing the requirements. It's good info, but I don't think people use our site to preview games and therefore need sys req recommendations. They likely already have, and are playing, the game, so they must already meet the reqs. If it will simplify our infobox, I'm for it. Procyon 01:07, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Indeed it seems way out of place and takes up a lot of vertical space in it's current form. Matthias (talk) 13:41, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
There were only two instances of the requirements parameter in the infobox which weren't for PC games, so I've removed them and added the info to the page directly. the template and all uses has now been deleted. -- Prod (talk) 04:36, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

KotOR template issue[edit]

The {{KotOR/Dialog}} template (among others) has optional parameters for colspan, rowspan and bgcolor which no longer work correctly. You should be able to see this in the second and third examples under Usage in the documentation, but for convenience this:

KotOR Icon Dialog.png 1. C=2 B=dark KotOR Icon Dialog.png 2. R=2 B=light
KotOR Icon Dialog.png 3. W=25% B=Sentinel KotOR Icon Dialog.png 4. W=50% B=Consular

Should look like this:

colspan=2 bgcolor=ffdddd rowspan=2 bgcolor=d0d5f1
width=25% bgcolor=ffff99 width=50% bgcolor=ddffdd

Weirdly, the rowspan parameter seems to work as long as there's no width parameter, while the opposite is true for the colspan parameter (which also seems to prevent the bgcolor parameter from working... as does not including a width parameter):

KotOR Icon Dialog.png 1. W=75% C=2 B=dark KotOR Icon Dialog.png 2. W=25% R=2 B=light
KotOR Icon Dialog.png 3. W=25% B=Sentinel KotOR Icon Dialog.png 4. B=Consular

This template (among others) was definitely still working back in May, and I don't know what's changed since then to break it (it hasn't been edited since January). Perhaps the breakage isn't universal, but only applies to specific browsers (I use Firefox) or operating systems (I was upgraded to Windows 10 in March)? Any idea what's gone wrong, and how to fix it? Onderduiker (talk) 18:57, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Fixed. Check out Special:ExpandTemplates. -- Prod (talk) 19:55, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! I think I've now fixed all similar KotOR templates, but I'll double-check as I continue to work on the guide. Onderduiker (talk) 20:45, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Arrow Template[edit]

Permission to add diagonals to the arrow template? I already have them nice and ready and I think it'd be very useful as a stand in for generic D-Pad controls or directions. Antwan 14:00, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

That should be helpful. What are you thinking of using for the names? -- Prod (talk) 14:13, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Like the rest that do use diagonals: UpLeft, UpRight, DownLeft, and DownRight. I can even put a circle for a neutral command if needed. Antwan 22:43, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
You're talking about the {{arrow}} template right? That would actually be pretty cool to get diagonals! Do you need help updating the template as well? -- Prod (talk) 00:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
That's right. The arrow template. I'm not sure how to edit it though and the Help page recommended that I contact the staff before I do that. I got the arrows ready. I just need to upload them. Antwan 02:12, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
It's not too extensively used, so you can probably try it out if you'd like. Anything can be reverted if it breaks :). I'd suggest uploading the images with similar names/categories as the current ones first, so you can see if it works. -- Prod (talk) 04:31, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

And done! Enjoy your new generic diagonals! For reference, these are their wiki markups: Generic UpLeft.png {{arrow|UpLeft}}, Generic UpRight.png {{arrow|UpRight}}, Generic DownLeft.png {{arrow|DownLeft}}, Generic DownRight.png {{arrow|DownRight}} Antwan 07:26, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Prod (talk) 16:46, 11 August 2016 (UTC) Atari 2600 games[edit] seems to have a bunch of Atari 2600 games available for play directly from the web browser: Should we link them in the external links section of each page? Maybe add them to a category that links to Or maybe just add a link to the system's page? -- Prod (talk) 00:26, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

I would be in favor of this. However, is not just limited to the Atari 2600. Their "virtual living room" section has a ton of systems. We would have to make up our mind if this feature was going to be limited to the 2600, or open to every system they support. And in doing so, we'd have to do it in a way that makes it clear that this is ONLY for, and not a bunch of flash game sites that surround their games with advertisements everywhere... Procyon 01:07, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
It looks like there are around 3000 games in the Console Living Room collection. It would be really cool if we could embed the games directly here, but perhaps a partner box like {{Zeldawiki}} may be the best option? -- Prod (talk) 16:39, 14 August 2016 (UTC)


Why does {{~}} exist? It's a quick way to link subpages within the current project but, as Prod has just pointed out to me, [[../page name/]] and {{~|page name}} have the same result, and by extension so do [[../page name|label]] and {{~|page name|label}}. Is it redundant, and should usage be avoided?

I ask because I've been considering making a more generic version of {{KotOR}}, which is a quick way of linking to page sections within the Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic project: for example, to link to Nerve Enhancement Package I can just use {{KotOR|Implants|Nerve Enhancement Package}} instead of [[../Implants#Nerve Enhancement Package|Nerve Enhancement Package]].

I was considering editing {{~}} to achieve this, but the new parameter order would be counter-intuitive ( {{~|page name|label|section name}}, not {{~|page name|section name|label}} ) and it's already linked to over 500 pages (although it'll be less than 500 once I remove it from pages I edit).

If I created a new template, provisionally ?, to allow a quick way to link page sections within the current project, then I'm pretty sure I'd use it on multiple projects, even if no one else did... or does such a template or other functionality already exist? Onderduiker (talk) 10:20, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

In theory (and not in practice because we don't typically go two sub-directories deep), {{~}} has and advantage over the .. usage in that it can be used to refer to a link off of the main guide, even if you were two sub-directory levels deep. With the .. approach, you'd have to use "../..", etc. That's really about the only advantage I can think of. Your approach to changing the behavior of {{~}} seems weird to me because in just about every wiki convention, the label comes last. You are definitely more than welcome to make a custom template that supports your work, regardless of whether anyone else might use it. If it's useful to you, it's useful to the site. I'm just not sure about "?" for the name, although I don't have a better suggestion. Procyon 01:07, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
{{~}} is already in use on just over 500 pages and already has two parameters (1 = page name, 2 = optional label), so adding a third would be problematic. I could add an optional S parameter to maintain the conventional order ( {{~|page name|S=section name|label}} or {{~|1|S|2}} ) but that's not ideal either.
Hence I'm leaning towards creating a new template. Due to the frequency with which I'll use it, its name should ideally be a single character, and I suggested "?" because the links will often be used to answer the question, "What's that (again)?" (for example, items listed in merchant inventories).
I've checked Wikipedia templates and there doesn't appear to be one by this name, so it shouldn't cause confusion. I'm open to other suggestions though (S for section? Also looks like ~ once flipped horizontally and rotated 90°), and I plan to work on model screenshots for the next week or so, so a decision isn't that urgent. Onderduiker (talk) 11:07, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
I also thought {{~}} would be pretty cool until Najzere (talk · contribs) showed me [[../Page/]]. I'd rather switch to that instead of the template since it's part of the software and probably more efficient. {{s}} is probably a good option, with usage like {{s|page|section}}. Adding a parameter for label is redundant with the ../ syntax and I think only saves 1 character.
{{~|Page#section Name|Label}}
{{s|Page|section Name|Label}}
[[../Page#Section name|Label]]
-- Prod (talk) 16:23, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out the redundancy of the label parameter for my proposed template. I'll create {{s}} shortly for use when section name = label... although I'm a little surprised something like this doesn't already exist here, since you can't just create pages for everything for ease of linkage (although even when you can, you probably shouldn't: hundreds or thousands of pages can be harder to organize, maintain and navigate). Onderduiker (talk) 19:38, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Remove media parameter from game infoboxes[edit]

I'm thinking of getting rid of the |media parameter from infoboxes. We have less than 100 games which use the parameter. I feel it's unnecessary information, that is better covered elsewhere. Console games generally have only one possible media, apart from eShops which are listed as a method of distribution. The only distinguishing point is the size of the media (256 Megabit cartridge), which is not useful for guides, and should be listed elsewhere. PC games are slightly more interesting (floppies), but all modern games are generally available via digital distribution (Steam). -- Prod (talk) 01:38, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

I'd agree. It's only useful for a very few cases, and that can be handled on the Getting Started page or PCGamingWiki when it's relevant. For other computer platforms supporting multiple media formats, such as Commodore 64, the worry about whether you have the needed tape or disk drive is no longer important simply because of the current situation. Even PC games might not be that interesting, as most floppy/CD games can be installed on the hard disk, as opposed to the unique ones that run directly from disk. --Sigma 7 (talk) 01:59, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Also agree, but primarily because I don't really work on too many computer games, so it doesn't affect me greatly. Sigma's points about the PCGamingWiki are valid, but only for DOS/Windows games, and probably won't be applicable to older Atari and Commodore systems. That being said, I really don't know who would come here seeking that specific information. Presumably, they're coming here because they already possess in the game, in whatever format, and are here to learn how to play the game, not how to load it. Procyon 17:46, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

NES Classic Edition[edit]

A user made this change. This seems like it should be it's own system, since it's completely standalone and connects directly to the TV. -- Prod (talk) 16:51, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

That begs the question of whether standalone, non-expandable systems are systems in the traditional sense at all. An arguable alternative is that the whole system could be treated as a compilation cartridge with no system at all. I think the footnote is worth leaving on the Category page, linking to a main game page similar to Namco Museum or something similar. Procyon 17:46, 19 August 2016 (UTC)