Talk:Malice (1997 video game)

Untitled

I have removed the part where it talk about engine changes, because is not true, it just QuakeC code. Clever and amazing modern for his time, but not engineside.

--Tei.

postdata:

Just in case, heres is the source code for exploding_object (breakable walls)

 void (string name,float amount) RockPieces =
 {
	local entity rock;

	rock = spawn ();
	rock.origin_x = (self.absmin_x + (random () * self.size_x));
	rock.origin_y = (self.absmin_y + (random () * self.size_y));
	rock.origin_z = (self.absmin_z + (random () * self.size_z));
	setmodel (rock, name);
	setsize (rock, VEC_ORIGIN, VEC_ORIGIN);
	rock.velocity = VelocityForDamage ((amount * SPAWNFLAG_LASER));
	rock.movetype = MOVETYPE_BOUNCE;
	rock.solid = SOLID_NOT;
	rock.avelocity_x = (random () * 300);
	rock.avelocity_y = (random () * 300);
	rock.avelocity_z = (random () * 300);
	rock.think = SUB_Remove;
	rock.nextthink = ((time + 1.5) + (random () * SPAWNFLAG_SUPERSPIKE));
 };

 void () wall_touch =
 {
	sound (self, CHAN_WEAPON, "misc/crumble.wav", SPAWNFLAG_SUPERSPIKE, ATTN_NORM);
	WriteByte (MSG_BROADCAST, SVC_TEMPENTITY);
	WriteByte (MSG_BROADCAST, TE_EXPLOSION);
	WriteCoord (MSG_BROADCAST, self.absmin_x);
	WriteCoord (MSG_BROADCAST, self.absmin_y);
	WriteCoord (MSG_BROADCAST, self.absmin_z);
	self.movetype = MOVETYPE_NONE;
	self.touch = SUB_Null;
	self.solid = SOLID_NOT;
	RockPieces ("progs/rubble1.mdl", self.health);
	RockPieces ("progs/rubble2.mdl", self.health);
	RockPieces ("progs/rubble3.mdl", self.health);
	remove (self);
 };

 void () exploding_object =
 {
	precache_model ("progs/rubble1.mdl");
	precache_model ("progs/rubble2.mdl");
	precache_model ("progs/rubble3.mdl");
	precache_sound ("misc/crumble.wav");
	setmodel (self, self.model);
	if ((self.atomic_intensity == SPAWNFLAG_SUPERSPIKE))
	{
		self.takedamage = DAMAGE_NO;
	}
	else
	{
		self.takedamage = DAMAGE_YES;
	}
	self.health = 80;
	self.th_die = wall_touch;
	self.classname = "e_oj";
	self.use = wall_touch;
	self.solid = SOLID_BSP;
	self.movetype = MOVETYPE_PUSH;
 };

 void () walkthrough_object =
 {
	setmodel (self, self.model);
	self.solid = SOLID_NOT;
	self.classname = "e_oj";
 };

As you can see, is simple QuakeC code, not C code.

Arrgh.. how you put code examples in wikisyntax? ---

Fixed it for you. 2fort5r (talk) 08:28, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Undoing revert

Hi @Hahnchen,

You've added one ref since undoing my revert. Granted, that's an increase of 100%, but still a total of two. Are there any other sources out there? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 20:23, 22 July 2017 (UTC) soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK§} 20:23, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Older games typically have offline coverge, as most gaming reviews at the time were in paper gaming magazines. That's where most of the sources on this topic are. The article even makes note of a couple paper sources. We need to find the issues that published these reviews.— InsertCleverPhraseHere 20:37, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

The game is only 20 years old. The internet was around back then. I'm having a hard time believing there aren't any online sources to be found, perhaps from a couple of years later. No WP:DEADLINE, but twelve years with one reference (and, I'm guessing, 30 minutes since the second), sounds like WP:MUSTBESOURCES. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 20:49, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

@soetermans. The internet might have been around, but game reviews were still typically in gaming magazines, which were quite popular back then, (hence the offline PC Gamer review). Many of the online sources of the day may have disappeared without archival as well. In any case, the sourcing of the article as it currently stands satisfies WP:GNG even with the sources that we can find, if barely. If you want to convert it to a redirect (which is essentially soft deletion), take it to AfD, though I don't recommend this, as I expect it would survive quite easily. — InsertCleverPhraseHere 02:57, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Do you think that two sources is "significant coverage"? The plot and gameplay is unsourced. Why not merge it? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 07:33, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure you understand the meaning of "significant coverage" in terms of rule number 42. Each of these sources are "sources that discuss the topic directly and in detail" and are from reliable and independent sources. Two is "multiple". — InsertCleverPhraseHere 08:13, 23 July 2017 (UTC)