Talk:List of games using procedural generation

This article was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

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

Purple Francis (6 participants)
Gilman Louie (2 participants)
Yoshimitsu (2 participants)
Dr. Wily (8 participants)
First Internet Backgammon Server (3 participants)
Emote (2 participants)
Stardew Valley Guidebook (2 participants)
Preston Arsement (6 participants; relisted)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)
Melee (game terminology) (7 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Criterium for inclusion: proposal

I propose a single criterium for inclusion of new games on this list: that the game have either an article on Wikipedia or a page on Steam or other trusworthy gaming site. Red-linked games would have to include a reference to the said page. What do you think? If and while no one opines, I will be trying to make the page as compliant to that criterium as possible. - Alumnum (talk) 08:04, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there should be redlinks in this list. Having only notable entries (i.e. articles for each entry) is a common criteria to limit the list and avoid WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Steam is not "trustworthy", it's a storefront where the developer themselves put whatever information they want and everything else is user-generated and voted. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 17:02, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The list should consist of articles only, ones that can accurately demonstrate they belong to this category. Wikipedia is not for long indiscriminate and unverifiable lists. The steam links are not reliable sources. Ajf773 (talk) 18:59, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- It's going to take some effort to properly comply to WP:V and WP:BURDEN, but I agree that this is the only way to maintain this list from becoming and indiscriminate one. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 19:23, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - I honestly thought I was being petulant when I removed the entire list, but Hellknowz has already rebuilt it to something better than what we had. I am now actually feeling quite good about this page already, even if it will take a long time until the list contains a reasonable number of items. That's fine. I like the descriptions :) ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 19:57, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Game platforms

These were initially removed by User:Dissident93 followed by myself on two more occasions following a revert. There appears to be a generally consensus to remove. Editor (who also created the article) has not explained the important of this column which has been cited as trivial and more like catalogue material. Ajf773 (talk) 01:30, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the platform matters either. Something like "game engine" might be more interesting for this subject, but that too I am not sure of. A release year might be useful, however, as this list could be used to trace the history of significant usage of procedural generation. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:38, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think release year is useful for historical purposes and the column doesn't take much space. I am sort of neutral on the whole platform thing -- it doesn't really add much, although it might be useful to see what platforms have tendencies to have or have different procedural stuff. But the column takes up a lot of space. And same is true for genres. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 10:59, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it because platforms aren't directly related to the scope of games using procedural generation (it's usually a bloated field too). ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 18:13, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Dissident. You're here at this list to find out about procedural generation. If you find a game you want to know more about, you can click on it. Re:Hellknowz's point, "Distribution/prevalence of procedural generation in games across platforms" might be mildly interesting, but a plainlist of platforms won't get you the information you want since it can't sort properly. Extraneous fields in this list should be interrogated thoroughly to minimize bloat and not crowd out useful information. Genre is straight out because it's a contentious, irregularly, and idiosyncratically applied label that no one can agree on. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:21, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

People just love add tons of info, no matter how relevant or not, to lists/tables like these. If we didn't have guidelines for this sort of thing, this list would have things such as ESRB ratings, price, review score, singleplayer/multiplayer checklist, and lead staff. (which I've all personally removed from other lists before). ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 18:34, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Atari Pitfall

The Atari Pitfall game used procedural generated levels. https://hackaday.com/2013/06/05/retrotechtacular-how-i-wrote-pitfall-for-the-atari-2600/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lionjim (talk • contribs) 16:56, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]