Jump to content

Talk:Joust (video game)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleJoust (video game) has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 17, 2010Good article nomineeListed

Comment

[edit]
  • Hi people. I just added a bunch of stuff to this page. If you have any feedback, please give it. I'm still learning some of the rules to wikipedia, but I want to be as useful as I can. Elliotharmon 11:08, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I converted the table over to an infobox designed for arcade games. I didn't fill in the Ports row, feel free to include it. --Pagrashtak 19:21, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just came back to Wikipedia after several months away. Just a note about this article. "Unbeatable? Pterodactyl" is not a mistake. That's what the game calls it, in both onscreen and written instructions. I'm not changing it right now, because the entire "gameplay" section needs to be rewritten. Elliotharmon 18:32, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

cheats, also 2600

[edit]

I added a word "a" that was clearly an unintentional ommition in the 1st sentence of the cheats section. Someone might wish to mention that the 2600 joust was pretty faithful for a 2600 game. I think it wa probably considered one of the most successful 2600 ports ever. I think they stretched it as far as it could go to port it so well. --Thaddeus Slamp 22:08, 16 February 2007 (UTC) I should clarify. If all instantiations of the class 2600 games have lousy sound and graphics, then such does not warrent mentioning. Such becomes a liability (that is to say the error is compounded)@ the point when 1, or a few games stand out as better than usual to whatever degree, yet one still mentions the game in terms of all members of a class. @ that point, one is pretty much as close to outright lying as is possible, without lying. The Important thing about the Joust Port, I beleive is that it was better than most 2600 games, not the tautological statement that the graphics and sound were poor (what; you mean to tell me it's a member of the class 2600 games, the knowledgable and logical reader is liable to tend to ask).Thaddeus Slamp 21:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW a ref:

http://web.archive.org/web/20060217082644/www.atariage.com/system_reviews.html?SystemID=2600&orderBy=Name&orderByValue=Ascending&recordsPerPage=100&currentPage=3

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Elliotharmon" (who seems to me to be the responsible party.

Species Of Mounts

[edit]

Alexis Ohanian of Reddit fame has publicly wondered about the player riding a roc instead of an ostrich. I remember seeing the cabinet, as well as reading the operator documentation clearly stating that player 1 is a ostrich, while player 2 rides a stork. Actually, I just double checked KLOV's copy of the docs and confirmed it; I will be making the change since the roc mention isn't cited while KLOV is. --DLWormwood 16:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I'm no fan of AOL, nor wish to advertise for GameTap, but as it is only the AOL link provides a fully-functional Joust game. It's hard to say one is an ad and the others (like Midway itself, duh?) are not ads. --User:75.185.127.48 08:57, 6 August 2007

Very simple, the GameTap version is an advertisement. Its presented as such, sold as such, and meant to be as such. The Midway and AOL ones are not. Likewise, all external links have to follow policy which is they are meant to illustrate the current entry by providing material not available here. Whether or not they are "full versions" are not the issue, this is not a place to provide game links. In fact, we technically don't need any of the links except for Midway's (which would be the only official one since they own the property). --Marty Goldberg 15:40, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Recent citation attempts

[edit]

Please understand, the citations you keep trying to add are not valid by WP:Cite or WP:Verify. These include the standards on references coming from established (verifiable) and *published* sources. Personal statements set in a reference tag are *not* valid references, as you've been told before. Likewise, the pterodactyl reference is grey line as Wikipedia also has a policy against referencing itself. I let it stay for now, but it really needs consensus as does the entire section since its bordering on strategy - something also not allowed. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 22:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese Distribution

[edit]

Who distributed Joust in Japan? Was it Taito?--66.177.73.91 (talk) 06:33, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is going on here?

[edit]

Wholesale reverting amounting to massive deletion of material is Not Good. I'm tempted to start reverting the reverts. Explain, please. - Denimadept (talk) 01:06, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

---> Previous version was completely ok. Valuable comments removed without consent from community. Avoid doing that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Power2084 (talk • contribs) 05:13, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've also reverted this, Power2084, please explain why you made those changes. It appears that you've removed a lot of sourced information from the article. Dayewalker (talk) 05:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that the previous version was ok. Lack of available development information and excess game guide details unbalance the topic in my opinion. However, I'm not so naive to believe that the current version is perfect, especially when the "Reception and legacy" is unfinished. What about the previous version do you think adds the most value to the topic? Perhaps content can be carried over. Once I have more free time to dedicate to Wikipedia, I plan to take this article to WP:GAN and hope this is settled before that. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:03, 4 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

GA discussion

[edit]

If we need the docs, let me know. I've got them. - Denimadept (talk) 20:29, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Joust (video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

1.Well-written

[edit]

Over-all clear and concise with a few grammatical nuances which interrupt the flow of reading.

The Lead

[edit]
  • I don't understand this sentence Staff worked within the technical limitations of the hardware (original developed two years earlier for Williams' first game, Defender), excluding concepts and optimizing the visuals.
  • Was the hardware "originally" developed two years earlier for Defender? Did this hardware have a name? And what are you trying to say with "excluding concepts and optimizing visuals."
  • In this sentence, I recommend wikilinking the word "sequel" to the article of Joust 2. Joust was followed by a sequel three years later, and was ported to numerous home and portable platforms.

Gameplay

[edit]
  • No issues

Development

[edit]
  • What are you saying here:"A pack of three AA batteries saves the game's settings and high scores when the machine is unplugged from an electrical outlet."? Are you inferring that the three AA batteries literally save the data or does it work like a backup generator for the arcade machine?
  • In this quote: "Hendricks originally picked grey for the buzzards, but chose green instead to optimize the color palette—the developers had only 16 colors to create the visuals." instead of a dash, perhaps you can replace it with the word as to make the sentence flow a bit easier.

Reception and legacy

[edit]
  • No Issues

2.Factually accurate and verifiable

[edit]
  • Quick Pass

3.Broad in its coverage

[edit]
  • Quick pass

4.Neutral

[edit]
  • Quick Pass

5.Stable

[edit]
  • Quick pass

6.Illustrated

[edit]
  • Quick Pass


I'm just putting down the criteria real quick so you can recognize i'm reviewing it. It'll come in piece by piece so I won't have my verdict until I reach the end. Final Word: Very, very good article. It seems the editors who worked on this have created good articles prior to this one. As soon as my complaints are adressed this passes with flying colors.

Reviewer: Subzerosmokerain (talk) 16:17, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to address your comments in this edit and in my reply below.
  • I did not link sequel per WP:OVERLINK. But I added it as a blue link will probably make the last paragraph easier to read.
  • The part after the em dash was difficult to fit in, so that's why I used the dash as per MOS:EMDASH. Anywhere else already broke the flow. Essentially, that's the best I could come up with, so I'm not sure how to copy edit it. I'm open to ideas though.
Let know if there's any thing else. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:16, 17 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]
Yeah, I see your point about OVERLINK. I guess I can let it slide. Maybe you can replace the dash with "as" instead? Well, it's only one thing so it doesn't make it any worse of an article. So i'll go ahead and pass it anyways. Nice article. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 23:26, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is "non-encyclopedic" ? And who better than Diderot can define that?

[edit]

Indeed, the purpose of an encyclopedia is to collect knowledge disseminated around the globe; to set forth its general system to the men with whom we live, and transmit it to those who will come after us, so that the work of preceding centuries will not become useless to the centuries to come; and so that our offspring, becoming better instructed, will at the same time become more virtuous and happy, and that we should not die without having rendered a service to the human race in the future years to come.[11] — Diderot

I am 40 and started videogames when videogames started. There is a whole new generation of gamers that has not had this pleasure. Why should not be considered encyclopedic to tell this new generation that a work like Joust has inspired other works? And a clever "clin-d'oeil" such as the Mt. Hyjal quest line in WOW deserves that, for both Joust lovers as I am and WOW lovers.

Yes, of course, you can dance on US3 without having a clue about Herbie Hancock and have fun all the same. But there is another way of appreciating the present, and that is the whole concept of history. Where do I come from? Where do I go? And how the heck did I get here?

Yet you could answer that inspiration in a work of art is not factual and therefore keep deleting references to World of Warcraft since they are non encyclopedic. But when they come from different users, from all ages, from all over the world, the censor should ask himself "why am I preventing those people to share the knowledge?

And if other editors of Wiki let Proust's fan write a section about "References in popular culture" for La Recherche du Temps Perdu (sorry, In Search of Lost Time for you English speakers), who is the censor who can decree that Joust does not deserve a section for Joust references in pop culture as well? To which degree we consider those kind of references unuseful and non encyclopedic for Joust when they are useful and encyclopedic for Proust? Just because the form of art is different? Imagery and game techniques of course are not as direct as a Monty Python's parody or a Cate Blanchett's line. And yet the reference, the homage is right there.

Knowledge is knowledge, and if you are not familiar with World of Warcraft and the Mount Hyjal chain, you just cannot recognise the homage. Which exists and is blatant to a discerning videogamer's eye.

--85.5.223.154 (talk) 00:55, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for coming to the talk page to discuss the addition. The World Of Warcraft homage is already linked in the article, under the reception section. There's no need for an entire section describing the homage. Dayewalker (talk) 01:09, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding "who is the censor who can decree....", the answer is the guidelines for the video game project, which were created by consensus of the project members (currently about 360 active Wikipedia editors are members). We have guidelines for popculture sections and content, as well as other areas. That's besides the general guidelines of Wikipedia itself. The long soapbox rant aside, I would strongly suggest becoming familiar with the guidelines for content and contributor governance here if you plan to continue to edit content. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 01:19, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One of Wikipedia's prime content directives is that we don't care and cannot include your (or any editor's) 40 years of personal experience. If you wish to share that, the proper venue would be to start a personal blog. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:58, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and if the OP is only 40, he's deluding himself if he thinks he's been in this since the beginning. The first known video game can not be younger than 1961, with Spacewar (video game). Even if he requires coin-op video games, PONG dates from 1972, which he would have been a bit too young to remember, being born in 1974. And I seem to remember something about a game from 1958 or 1959 as well. - Denimadept (talk) 21:25, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
One more thing. Regarding "encyclopaedic", "knowledge" and "anecdote" are not the same. We require published sources. See WP:OR for details. - Denimadept (talk) 21:33, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Joust (video game). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:29, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Joust (video game). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:06, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clone section?

[edit]

Was this gutted? Didn't it used to list DragonHawk and Glypha? --69.249.178.106 (talk) 11:45, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Joust (video game). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:18, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Joust (video game). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:29, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Joust (video game" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Joust (video game has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 3 § Joust (video game until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:00, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Joust_(video_game)&oldid=1239668214"