Talk:Fish Fillets NG

This article was nominated for deletion on 25 January 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

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

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

TheoTown (4 participants)
Redout (video game) (8 participants)
Old Grandma Hardcore (4 participants)
CarX Street (5 participants)
WePlay AniMajor (1 participant)
İstanbul Efsaneleri: Lale Savaşçıları (2 participants)
Zero Hour (video game) (3 participants; relisted)
VoxelStorm (1 participant; relisted)
Gilman Louie (4 participants; relisted)
Yoshimitsu (7 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

References.

Let's have some good references and citations, please. Thank you. GeorgeLouis (talk) 02:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a reference for the gameplay description. Kace7 (talk) 20:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Software vs. video game infobox

Hi @Shaddim, could you elaborate on your edit summary? What extensions are missing from the video game infobox that would be necessary for this article? Programming languages and software updates don't seem to be necessary for an open software video game to me. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 20:56, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Soetermans, while not necessary, beneficial. And the license selection is necessary, but not available in the VG template. cheers Shaddim (talk) 21:09, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Shaddim, I tried looking through WT:VG's archives, but I'm not sure where to look for. I took a glance at Category: Open-source video games, some use the video game infobox, some use the software infobox. As they're predominantly video games and not user software, is the license really necessary? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:33, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi soeterman, I'm not sure I would follow you in the interpretation that this software is more "video game" than "open source software". The proper solution would be to describe both persepctives properly, e.g. with an expansion of the video game infobox including the fields of the general software box (which represents more types of software properly). Or we could use two boxes. Or expand the software box with some fields from the VG box. cheers Shaddim (talk) 13:27, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article describes this purely from the context of a video game, not as a piece of software. There's also major issues with the infobox in that the initial release is shown as 2004, instead of 1998 as is the true case. The original developer and publisher, and platforms aren't covered, and the game mode is missing. SDL is listed as a language, but is not (It is a middleware layer). My recommendation at the very least would be Infobox VG for the original details, with a second infobox for the open source project. -- ferret (talk) 17:43, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"purely" i? this is not true, license and open sourcing topics are described in the hisotry section and were a defining aspect of this sotware/game. Without the license & open sourcing the spread and cross-platform distribution and continued support would not be possible. About "errors": such are no reason for removing these aspects but only for fixing. About SDL, the exact text in the box is "written in", which makes sense with SDL as the the game was written against the SDL API , therefore SDL fucntions were "written" in the code. Shaddim (talk) 18:08, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

edit: 2004 is for fish fillets next generation not the orignal one. this page is primarly on the next generation, the original fish fillets is some predecesor. In fact, hisotry should be expaned. cheers Shaddim (talk) 18:09, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]