Talk:List of free first-person shooters

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
VG To-do:

If you remove a game please state why you have removed it, if the reason is documented then it is less likely to be re-added and it can be re-submitted if the circumstances change. If you have something to discuss please do so in the appropriate section. If you want to add a game to the list please read the criteria section before doing so, if you are unsure ask. Please avoid lumping multiple games in the same section, rather discuss each game independently in its own section.

Contents

[edit] List of rejected/removed games

Game Reason for rejection
GunZ: The Duel Not a first-person shooter.
TrueCombat: Elite Not a standalone game.
War Rock Free version is crippled.

[edit] Criteria

[edit] Criteria for inclusion in this list

The criteria for inclusion in this list needs to be clearly defined. From what I can make out from reading through this talk page the criteria are:

  • no alpha/beta games
  • no full conversions ie must be a full stand alone game
  • must be freely (as in no cost, vs in the free software sense) downloadable.
  • must be an active project, not historical/dead.
  • must have a wikipedia page.

I suggest that the requirement that the game has a wikipedia page is bogus and should be dropped, if you disagree please provide some coherent reasoning for this requirement.

I also suggest that we add the requirement that the game is fully stand alone, ie that you only need to download one binary and not multiple components in order to play the game. If this were a requirement then FreeDoom Would need to be removed as it requires combining the freeDoom wads with one of a number of doom engines.

My proposed requirement list is:

  • no alpha/beta games
  • no full conversions ie must be a full stand alone game, downloadable as a single binary
  • must be freely (as in no cost, vs in the free software sense) downloadable.
  • must be an active project, not historical/dead.

When a game is deleted we can then state that it was deleted as it does not meet one of the defined requirements. Please comment on this proposal below. Htaccess 07:21, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

"must have a wikipedia page" isn't actually a requirement if you can provide citations for notability and verifiability. However, if you have those references you may as well make a Wikipedia article for it, even if it's just a stub.
My proposed requirement list:
  1. described by independent references as a first-person shooter
  2. is notable, per WP:N (which shouldn't be a problem if #1 is from a good source)
  3. free (no shareware, or requiring another piece of software to run {no mods}, or requiring a commercial data file to run {so no DOOM ports})
MarašmusïneTalk 18:09, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
About Doom ports, they are no longer graphically appealing as well, i mean outdated, so they can be safely removed from the list IMO. Acetylcholine 22:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't think the age of games is an issue. I think I will add another table here for "free first-person shooter engines" and include things like Aleph One and FreeDOOM (providing they don't require commercial game files). MarašmusïneTalk 08:12, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree the age should not make a difference but do agree that FreeDOOM should be removed from the list as it requires a separate game engine to play. I like the free engine table but perhaps it should be a new article? Htaccess 08:53, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
I think perhaps a full List of free game engines (not limiting it to just FPS engines). I'm not sure how many FPS engines there are, but if there are only half a dozen or so, they may as well stay here. MarašmusïneTalk 09:11, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
It depends if you include derivative engines or just the original, ie just the quake engine or include DarkPlaces and Tenebrae (software). Either way I think you will be surprised just how many there are, check out, I suspect theres enough to warrant an independent article. Htaccess 09:31, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] first person full games only

this is a list for free first person full version games only

Since this is a First Person Shooter list. There is no need to continually repeat that a game is a first person shooter.

[edit] What is a full game?

I mean, you take .kkrieger on the list as a full game (it is only 100k). Is the JavaScript version of Wolfenstein 3D (aka Wolfenstein 5K) also a full first-person shooter then?

BTW, Starsiege: Tribes requires a CD-key. Ergo, you have to pay, with time. (to wait for the guys to produce new CD-keys (it says so on the page)) Then a lot of other games is also free, you just have to get an account first. Doesn't make sense.

--80.63.213.182

  • Starsiege Tribes does not require any CD key to play nor does it have any copy protection. Only Tribes 2 has a CD key and account check. CheapAlert 23:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Also, .kkrieger is nothing but a tech demo showoff, so it shouldn't be listed here anyway. CheapAlert 23:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
      • .kkrieger is a tech demo, but is intended to be a full game. It is a first person shooter, free to use and distribute, and will never cost anything, assuming they ever finish it. --Chief1983 20:30, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Standalone games betas?

I would like to ask if a beta of a standalone game would be aloud here

NO betas

If it's notable and verifiable, it shouldn't matter if it is a beta or not. MarašmusïneTalk 09:14, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why only standalone?

I don't quite understand the requirement for game to be "standalone" or a single executable to be listed. A lot of free games are based on engines that have been made public domain. So while technically you could call these games a "full conversion mod", and while often you will have to download the engine separately from the actual game, I don't see the logic why this should be a hurdle to including them in the list.
After all, if the point of the list is to help people find free, good games, then why exclude full conversion mods, if everything in that mod (including the engine) is freely available?
Developers will often have to rely on previously created engines, upon which they can then base a totally new and unique games. Something that might be impossible if they would have to develop that component as well. --Frescard (talk) 23:47, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

The point of the list is to aid navigation of Wikipedia articles. Mods, where notable, are on their own lists such as List of Half-Life 2 mods. Marasmusine (talk) 08:09, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't understand how this list could help in WP navigation. Would you mind to elaborate?
I would expect the typical visitor to this page to be someone who's looking for a decent, but free, game (with the priority on FREE). Now, that person will not care too much if it's standalone, or based on a freeware engine, he just wants to know what's available. At least that's the way it worked for me, when I wanted to set up a "goodwill" MP server, and was looking for something free for visitors to download. I found this page quite useful, and the least I cared about in that situration was whether something was "standalone" or not... --Frescard (talk) 18:53, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I'd advise that kind of visitor to possibly visit a games directory site instead! The reason being that this list is only going to contain games with WP articles (which ideally will only be notable, verified games), so isn't exactly a complete list of all free first-person shooters that are available.
However, I am completely open to the idea of listing mods as a seperate table (perhaps below the game engines table), again as long as they point to WP articles so that notability can be asserted. Marasmusine (talk) 19:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion of specific games

[edit] Acid Arena

This game does not state on its front page that it is freeware but it is freeware. Here is the link to it http://acidarenaweb.free.fr/ . Acetylcholine 23:29, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Acetylcholine, I saw you re-added several games but this time with external links. I've reverted this because unfortunately these game lists tend to get filled up with spam/advertising in the form of external links. One measure we've introduced is to not allow external links at all, only links to Wikipedia articles. Think of the list as a form of wiki-navigation. You could have a go at making a stub article for the games you think should be in the list, bearing in mind our WP:Verifiability policy and WP:Notability guideline. Thanks, MarašmusïneTalk 07:51, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok. I will try to make articles about each of them according to Wikipedia guidelines. Acetylcholine 13:49, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Acid Arena isn't even legal. It bundles Quake3's assets, and it itself is derived from Quake3's assets, and distributes it all for users without quake3 intending it as its own game (and has been doing this before the source release as well). Leileilol 06:24, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Excellent, drop me a note on my talk page if you need any help! MarašmusïneTalk 14:16, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Allegiance

Should Allegiance be here? It's a space sim but it's first person.

It's a team based combat game. Theres also this too, freealleg wiki http://www.freeallegiance.org/FAW/index.php/Allegiance WiskyGhost (talk) 22:42, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Apophis

Apophis was recently added to the list, but since it is a newly started project, its website has zero content about the game itself, and since there are no files whatsoever, I feel that it should be deleted from the list, seeing as it is currently nothing more than a gamedesign, thus meaning that currently it is not a "Free first-person shooter". Can anyone clarify the reasons of this game being on the List of free first-person shooters? -Moosedor 17:22, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Apophis (game) is currently being proposed for deletion. If no-one contests it, and it is deleted, then we can remove it from this list. I agree that it doesn't seem particularly notable. Marasmusine 17:34, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battlefield 2142

First time suggesting anything here, but would Battlefield's limited demo qualify for this list ? It allows access to one gamemode and two maps, but is unlimited in every other sense.

Because it's a demo of a larger version, I'd say no. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.26.131.217 (talk) 00:11, 12 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Black Shades

Would Black Shades qualify for this list? It's free, has a singleplayer 'campaign', and the way I see it, should be added to the list. On the other hand, it feels rather basic and more of a gameplay demonstration/test than anything else.

I really would like to keep all games out of this list that don't already have their own page on Wikipedia. --Lijnema 22:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thats an arbitrary prerequisite to base inclusion in the list on, perhaps you should consider renaming this list as List of free first-person shooters that have pages on wikipedia? Htaccess 06:48, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BZFLAG

Can someone prove this is a FPS and not a 3rd person... if not then it has to be gone. Sassan May 22, 2006

  • Yes. Play the game, and you'll see that it is definitely a first person game. The camera is in the tank, not behind it. Chief1983 21:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Please do not remove BZFlag from the list without good reason. It is a first-person shooter (it's even categorized as one in Wikipedia's list of fps's), just because it doesn't involve being a human with free aim doesn't mean it's not an FPS. CheapAlert 22:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Close Quarter Combat

Why was this deleted--66.8.238.104 03:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] D-Day: Normandy

D-Day: Normandy seems to require a FilePlanet subscription so you'll have to pay to be able to download it. Is it still free then? // Liftarn 12:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Use [1] to get it.

[edit] Death Illustrated

Broken Link To Death Illustrated Site, jus thought I'd point that out. Medavox 12:28, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

What should be done about Death Illustrated? It no longer has an official page, and the current solution, the "---Website Not Available---" marker is just awful. I'm guessing we should just delete that section. (And please sign your posts with four Tildes ~) Zirka 17:13, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I deleted the post... because it doesnt exist Sassan May 22, 2006

[edit] Dispatch of Army

What happened to dispatch of army? Why was it removed? I dont see any reason why it should have been.

I put is back--LizardPariah 03:19, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fear Combat

Whiel the website didn't seem to definitely say, this appears to be a free expansion to F.E.A.R., not a standalone, in which case it shouldn't be listed. Does anyone know for sure? Ace of Sevens 21:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

It's free, I tried it and it runs perfectly free of charge, should be listen on this list now. [Sassan]

I added it to the list, but it could use some more info and a picture. Cpuwhiz11 01:20, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GunZ

can people please stop adding GunZ to this list, it is clearly a 3rd person game and does not belong here.

[edit] Hidden & Dangerous

I added Hidden & Dangerous, but I know nothing about it. Please someone improve the entry. Ace of Sevens 20:28, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Is it even GPL-like copyrighted? cannot find source anywhere. Also, the download source is dubious, is wikipedia advertising for 3D Gamers now? (I find those sites very anoying) PS i am sure Ace of Sevens was good-intentioned. (Anonymous) 12:55, 23 Apr 2007

While I don't think 3D Gamers should be advertised it's not a "dubious" site by any means and several "big name" publishers in the past have used it's services to release their own files or demos. In other words it's unlikely they'd be giving a pirated version of the game for download. Since the game's listed as freeware I'll give it a quick download will add it to the list if it turns out to be a proper FPS. ( http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/hidden-dangerous-deluxe/screenshots seem to indicate that it is) --WildKard (talk) 01:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kingpin

kingpin was removed and will not be added agian tell an official website link saying the game is free is supplied

[edit] Kuma\War

I hope I'm in the right place...Kuma\War should be on the Free First-Person Shooters list. There used to be a subscription fee of $9.99 per month, but now the games are entirely free and can be downloaded at www.kumawar.com. Can you please include this service? Thank you for your time.

It seams you are right and this is a free first person shooter. It has been placed back on the page.
This is not a complete free game, it is only in open beta stages, if anyone can prove that this game is free forever then it will stay on the page.
Not to mention I think I played it and it was third person.--72.70.53.87 22:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Keith from KumaGames here. I'm the CEO and I assure you that Kuma\War is completely free to consumers. There was a subscription product in 2003 and 2004, but the game has been free since then. Kuma 1 has 74 free episodes and Kuma 2 -- the open beta -- has 4 free episodes. We are adding new free episodes every month. Kuma 1 is 1st and also 3rd person; Kuma 2 is 1st person only. We appreciate your efforts to keep Wikipedia accurate -- this is the latest info, right from the horses mouth.

[edit] Kwari

It seems fairly notable to be a game centered entirely upon making money - or loosing it. Even though it's in the beta phase, would it still qualify for inclusion ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.182.133 (talk) 23:06, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Legends

Legends looks like a good candidate for inclusion in this list, it uses the Torque Game Engine, and is similar to tribes2, it does however still appear to be a beta, I have not played it yet, can someone who has comment on its maturity.

Is it notable? MarašmusïneTalk 07:09, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I find the whole notability thing incredibly subjective, I prefer to ask the question "is it useful to a significant number of people"? To answer your question, yes I think it probably is notable but as I haven't evaluated it carefully I'm not sure. Obviously according to the (hopefully newly defined) criteria for inclusion it doesn't have an article yet, so I will create one (and probably have to argue with the notability police) before adding it. Htaccess 07:45, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, to put it another way, Wikipedia only reports what has already been reported by secondary sources. If Legends: The Game has had any kind of review or article from a reliable source then let's get a stub written for it and pop it in the list. Now I've had a quick look and can only see directory entries like this, but perhaps you know of something more substantial. MarašmusïneTalk 18:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Enough with all of this... The whole notability thing is ignorant. Question the notability??? DOWNLOAD THE GAME AND SEE IF IT IS FREELY DISTRIBUTED AND A FULL WORKING GAME. EXTREMELY SUBJECTIVE.

Legends is an extremely popular game amongst the Tribes community... It has a large following... you have Tribes included in the list... why not Legends? There are 2 Digg articles about it:

http://digg.com/linux_unix/Legends_The_Game

and

http://digg.com/gaming_news/Legends_the_game_--_Amazing,_free_multiplayer_Tribes-like_FPS

The game is not in beta or alpha... it's been a full release for a while now.

Get over the ignorant issues and open your eyes to the true situation at hand. This is a free game that has been out for a while and you are keeping the public from knowing about it, just because there isn't a wikipedia article about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.143.86.191 (talk) 23:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

If it's so unquestionably notable, why doesn't it have its own article? There was one, but it was deleted because there was nothing indicating notability. Just complaining doesn't really do anything. If you really want to see the game on the list here, why not make the article, make sure it has something that asserts notability (see the Wikipedia:Notability guidelines). Then add it to the list. --Lijnema (talk) 09:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I really do love how diehard wikipedia users are about keeping to standards.... it helps make sure things go smoothly... and maintains the accuracy of articles. However, this is one case that the guidelines should be ignored due to the reasons mentioned above. It seems that in the "diehardness" that wikipedia users have lost themselves in, they have also lost their dictionaries. They obviously do not understand that guidelines aren't set in stone, by definition. They are loosely followed directions that, by definition, are not required to be adhered to exactly. Give it up and allow Legends to go in without an article about it. This is now merely the principle of going against the guidelines. Bottom line if they are not GUIDELINES, then change the name of the NOTABILITY REQUIREMENTS to RULES.

Besides all that, here is a direct quote from the NOTABILITY guidelines page: "Notability guidelines do not directly limit article content - Notability guidelines give guidance on whether a topic is notable enough to be included in Wikipedia as a separate article, but do not specifically regulate the content of articles (with the exception of lists of people [11]). The particular topics and facts within an article are not each required to meet the standards of the notability guidelines; instead, article content is governed by other policies and guidelines, such as the policy requiring Verifiability and the guidelines covering the use of reliable sources and of trivia sections." It even states that article content is governed by other policies and guidelines.... such as the verifiability policy... which doesn't seem like it applies to a list... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.143.86.191 (talk) 20:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I still don't see what makes Legends so special that it has to be on the list, and I personally think having a Wikipedia article (or passing WP:N) is a good criteria. I also think keeping alpha/beta games out of the list is good, and despite what you've written, Legends is still in beta. --Lijnema (talk) 09:23, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

It has said "We will consider the game to be beta until it is done. " on the "About Legends" page since day one... when it really was in the alpha/beta... IT IS NO LONGER IN BETA... Look at the build number and you can see that they no longer put "beta" or "alpha" next to it, because it has gone past those stages... It's been a full release for a while now.

I personally do not think having a Wikipedia article is a good criteria... It makes no sense. The game exists... list it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.197.64.30 (talk) 00:28, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Lots of games exist, I think the list would spiral out of control if existance was the only criteria. What would you say is the problem with having notability as a criteria for inclusion in the list? --Lijnema (talk) 00:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Just a note, I see the Legends has over 1600 forum members and Nexuiz has only over 1400 members. So witch game is more notable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.226.74.105 (talk) 02:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia's notability guildelines to understand the concept of notability as it is used within Wikipedia. --Lijnema (talk) 00:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I did, this is still a list of personal favorite FPS. 96.226.74.105 (talk) 01:56, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

My point was that more forum members doesn't mean more notable. --Lijnema (talk) 12:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

AND once again... the notability guidelines are guidelines... not rules... AND MOST IMPORTANTLY ONLY DEFINE CRITERIA FOR ARTICLE SUBJECTS... NOT ARTICLE CONTENT. Better read it again. ONCE AGAIN. THE NOTABILITY GUIDELINES ONLY APPLY TO ARTICLE SUBJECTS... NOT CONTENT.

In regards to the question you posed about the problem with having notability as criteria for inclusion... I feel that this game is worthy of being listed. The list exists to define a set of free FPS. Legends is a high quality free FPS. Not only that, but going by the book, as stated above, the notability guidelines don't apply to article content (except when the content includes lists of people). In reality, the verifiability policy would govern it... but that policy requirement is already fulfilled due to "Diggs" two different articles. Outcomer (talk) 09:16, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Marathon (computer game series)

What about the Marathon series? The Aleph One (computer game) project is free... Alphax τεχ 15:02, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

You don't even need to mention Aelph. Bungie has the original binaries freely available. I plan on adding the section now, but seeing as I know little about the game, it'll probably need to be revised. --Zirka 17:15, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Open Arena

Excellent page. Why not add Open Arena ? (free implementation of Quake III based on the real Quake III engine) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Djib (talk • contribs) 21:01, 27 December 2006 (UTC).

I think it's way too beta for this page. Didn't this article have a NO ALPHAS/BETAS policy? Leileilol 04:33, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Well in a way yes beacause there are not many levels, but the engine is excellent and the game is already quite popular. --djib 22:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Penumbra

i dont know why "penumbra" is on this list of "freeFIRST PERSON SHOOTERS" when even the description states that penumbra is a free first person horror adventure game. I'm thinking it should be removed. Am i right?--Dylan Mather 22:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Purge

I dont see a reason why Purge should be removed.--LizardPariah 03:20, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sauerbraten

I added sauerbraten to the list. used mostly prewritten resources from wikipedia and the sauerbraten homepage. --Dylan Mather 22:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC) also added cube screenshot --Dylan Mather 22:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

The screenshot under cube 2 is from cube 1, not cube 2. Could someone please replace it with a cube 2 screenshot? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.200.42.106 (talk) 03:45, 13 May 2007 (UTC).

no, thats definetly a screen from Sauer... according to the image details in fact, its an official screenshot. you may be confused because the guns are alot the same in both games, and its hard to tell from a thumbnail? D.Mather 05:23, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Savage

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savage:_The_Battle_for_Newerth

this should be on the list as it was made free after initial release date.

agreed Htaccess 06:52, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Starseige 2845

As far as I can tell, this game isn't free, because I went to the homepage and there was no client download.

The game is free.--LizardPariah 03:19, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
The project is dead, according to their forums, and the link leads to the Clancore homepage, not the SS2845 page. Topic on Clancore forums -Drak Swordsman 11:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tribes

Broken Link to Sierra Starseige Tribes download, this link is broken...Dylan Mather 16:17, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I fixed the link by removing the sierra links and puting in a fileplanet one. Thanks for the spot Dylan Mather. Cpuwhiz11 00:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TrueCombat: Elite

Why not add Enemy Territory : True Combat to this list. It is just an Enemy Territory total conversion MOD but it makes it a totally different game :) --djib 01:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

games need to be fully stand alone and out of beta to be included on the list, total conversions don't qualify unfortunately. Htaccess 05:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Urban Terror

Is the anoucement good enough to add urban terror to the list, or should we wait too add it? 67.35.191.241 05:37, 1 September 2006 (UTC) Its a Mod, not a standalone game.

"We have successfully created a stand alone client for Urban Terror, using the urbanterror.exe and not requiring gamers to install Quake III Arena. This version has recently been released to the Quality Assurance Team and is undergoing testing. Urban Terror is still a mod and will be fully compatible with both Quake III Arena and our stand alone, urbanterror.exe." next time know what your talking about before you say something. User:Deuxhero 67.35.191.241 19:40, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget Urban Terror has executables for Linux and Mac OS X KrushrScumgrief (talk) 21:07, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] War Rock

can the game warrock be added to this list?

Someone should remove the "and is very fun to play" part. That's not a neutral point of view. It's an opinion.

Warrock fits the requirements of this page. It is free, and will remain free (Although a commercial version will come out, so it will be somewhat like Wolfenstien: Enemy Territory). I admit it is still being developed, but other games on this list are also in development (America's Army, for example, is still releasing new versions of itself). I would like to see Warrock back on there.

Ah, and on a side note, I'm not sure that the screenshots are appropriate for this. They seem more like advertisements, and the actual games look little or nothing like how their screenshot makes them look.

I notice Lijnema has removed Warrock, Lijnema could you please give your reasons for the removal, ie which criteria does it not satisfy? We are in the process of hammering out the definitive criteria for inclusion so please contribute to that as well. Thanks Htaccess 21:01, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I removed War Rock because although there is a free version, it is crippled. So it's not any more free than any shareware game. --Lijnema 22:27, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Warrock does have paid features, however you can earn in game currency through playing and getting kills. Buying currency with real money simply allows you to get better weapons faster than if you played for it. It meets all of the criteria mentioned above, being freely downloadable from warrock.net, has a wikipedia page, is an active project, is not a beta or a alpha, and is not a total conversion mod. So I have to say I disagree and I think warrock should be included with a note that some features are crippled for paid users. Nn123645 02:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
If everything you can get everything you can pay for through in-game methods without paying as well, then I agree. From the website I got a different impression, but if you can get everything without paying I'd agree. --Lijnema 07:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
You can't get everything in the free version. There is only a handful of maps, and weapons available. Plus clan support will not be available in the free version. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.32.134.74 (talk) 04:35, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
According to the Gamespot's review of the game "When you combine this system with real-world money, it's hard to shake the feeling that you didn't buy a mediocre game as much as you invested in a shady pyramid scheme. The retail version of War Rock includes a nice set of maps, a couple of cheap dog tags, and a few in-game goodies, like the mostly pointless M134 minigun. But you also get a free one-month subscription to the game--which makes you wonder exactly what you are subscribing to. As it turns out, signing up with your credit card earns you XP bonuses, a monthly allotment of dinar, the ability to create password-protected servers, or even another weapon slot, depending on which service you subscribe to. You can even purchase in-game currency with real money. But when you pay, you aren't paying for the game or the privilege of playing: You're paying either to gain an advantage because you get the good weapons, or to access features you'd expect to already be included in an online FPS. And in some cases, you're paying for features that don't work." http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/warrock/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;review . I don't know what improvements have been made since feburaury, when the review was written, but at that time the free and paid versions had negligible differences. Nn123645 20:33, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

What is the final verdict on this issue? It seems as if War Rock does not fully meet the in-development criteria [No alpha/betas], and is listed as a rejected game on this talk page. 82.111.138.148 (talk) 12:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't really want to see any game on this list that involves real-life money in any way whatsoever (except for developers asking for donations...) Marasmusine (talk) 12:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wolfenstein

Return to Castle Wolfenstien, i purchased it, i was at their site.

Looking for Enemies Terriory, you people listed it is a free game not a demo.
so...i am wondering, if Return to Castle is a demo, free game or not free

>x<ino 01:23, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

"Return to Castle Wolfenstein" and "Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory" are very different. The former is not free, while the latter is. User:Phbbt107

[edit] X Operations

I added xoperations to the list. I also added multiple links because the game is made by Japanese developers, and the majority of people that are going to look at this dont read/speak japanese so i felt it nessecary to include my X operations page (http://xoperations.freehostia.com and also included a russian page, though im not nessecarily sure how useful it will be. Please leave the english one as it is an obvious neccesity. --Dylan Mather 23:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion of multiple games

[edit] Added missing games

I added three missing games: Purge (game), Shootout the Game and Starsiege: 2845

LizardPariah

[edit] Axian Quake and Didgital Paintball

why they were deleted form the list what gives?

Yes, Digital Paintball is a great game. BUT, according to various people, it isn't notable enough. The article on Digital Paintball was deleted. (Personally, I think it is notable enough) --wj32 talk | contribs 01:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Those stupid wiki fascists —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.77.43.169 (talk) 00:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Unexplained removal of 5 games by E-Magination

Why were these 5 games removed? Here is the diff: [[2]]

Death Illustrated
Digital Paint: Paintball 2.0
Duck Hunt 3D
Flamewar!
World of Padman

If there is a valid reason for removal, that's fine, please provide it. However, isn't it usually the custom that there is an explanation given for removals on the talk page? If I don't hear anything on this I'll be putting these games back on when I get the chance. --JeffryJohnston 14:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Simple: they don't have an article. This is Wikipedia, not a open directory.--=='''[[User:E-Magination''' ==]] 15:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

your reasoning is spurious, there is no requirement that wikipedia lists only list things that have an article on wikipedia, thats braindead, if that were the case there would be nothing in wikipedia. Inclusion in the list with a link to a nonexistent page will encourage the production of that page, this is how wikipedia improves. I also suggest clearly defining somewhere what all the requirements are for inclusion in this list and not have them scattered throughout the talk page.
It's a measure that seems to be general concensus. This kind of video game list is a common target for spam. If a game belongs on the list, it doesn't take long to create a quick stub article with one or two reliable sources. If sources can't be found for verification, then it shouldn't be in the list. You also have Wikipedia:Requested articles at your disposal. MarašmusïneTalk 07:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
If its the consensus then I'm happy to go with it as I'm happy to add stubs. I still regard it as slightly arbitrary but will defer to consensus, I suppose it is a valid notability filter. Htaccess 07:36, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New games added to the list with there links to make them verifiable

Namely: Cellfactor:Revolution, Control monger, Dispatch of Army, Kingsborn, NTE: Strike and Retrieve, Realm Wars, Wulfram and War Rock. Direct links to there official webpages have been added and i hope that it is enough to assert there verifiability as all of them state that they are Freeware and this is what this article is about. I could not find any other source for them apart from Freewaregames.net and i do not think that it should get any priority over the game's original webpages if they are present. I added direct links because my last edit was removed. Acetylcholine 23:29, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, i wasted my time on finding and entering above entries, only War Rock and Cellfactor: Revolution were verfiable and worthed to be mentioned, there would still be some doubts over Cellfactor!!! I am still in learning phase, will be careful next time. Acetylcholine 14:36, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] semi-plug

Many of these titles are available on my site, and if they're not yet, they will be. i just thought someone should check over there to see if i've got anything not on this list. in particular there are lots of linux and amiga titles for full download there which probably aren't listed here. Also, if there's anything I'm missing, please let me know. I have included, particularly older DOS games, many "abandonwarez" titles. I make my best effort to find a way to purchase them (other than used) and if one cannot be found, i'll put the game up. Advocate (Advocate@firstpersonshooter.org firstpersonshooters.net/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.243.107 (talk) 17:01, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requests for Improvements

[edit] NPOV?

Should this page be edited for closer to NPOV? I'm seeing things like "beautiful effects" and "great graphics and gameplay" and wondering if these should be reworded.

I had the exact same response. It reads like a giant ad. An article describing why people distribute free games would be encyclopedic, and should probably be at Free first-person shooter to follow naming conventions. If this is just going to list games, then it should be at List of free first-person shooters or possibly just turned into a category. In any case, something needs to be done about its tone. - BanyanTree 15:08, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
I agree. --Member 21:30, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Aww, you pathological pedants! They're free, no one's ripping you off if you go and download one :P --Sigmundur 21:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Free software vs. freeware

I had hoped to be able to tell which if any of these games are opensource. In todays world of trojans and spyware, having source available is a prerec for installing software.. so could we add license info to the list? maybe OSI approved, Closed but free to play, Closed but free for non-comercial, etc etc?

I'd like that too. I was confused because of the disambiguity of the word "free". I had hoped to find Free Software games here. Geronimooo 21:55, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

These games definitely need to state their license for us to check whether the are free (as a free speech) or freeware. For example America's Army (according to [3]) is freeware). CodeRED: Alien Arena requires reqistration, so likely to be freeware. Control Monger's website does not show license and download section does not contain sources -> sure freeware. --Alvin-cs ✉ 23:47, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Codered doesn't require any registration at all, and it is freeware however the engine itself is under the GPL. CheapAlert 23:07, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

"Freeware" does not mean Free. If the engine is GPL and the game is "Freeware," this does not make the game "free." The data files need to be OSI Free for a Free game; if they're restricted, the game is not Free. --User:Bluefoxicy

  • Control monger is open beta, and so, should be deleted. In fact, i'll do that right now. --User:phbbt107

The top of the page should be modified to something like "A list of free of charge first-pe..." -- User:viller

What is the reasoning of having the word "free" in the article link to "free_software" if there are f'ing proprietary, yet freeware games in the list, don't people realize the difference between free software and freeware? Which is it? -- User:kirsa.t —Preceding comment was added at 03:58, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MB is wrong

The size of bynary files should be in the bynaries measures. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix And spread the word please. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.136.33.130 (talk) 22:32, 16 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Screenshots

Please add a screenshot for every game you add on the list. Thank you everyone

[edit] Singleplayer / Multiplayer

I think we need to make it clear which games are singleplayer or multiplayer. "War Rock" was the game that bothered me the most, because even on its own page it didn't state this. I dont know enough about the field to fill in these gaps myself -- all I know is that I dont like multiplayer shooters so dont want to bother downloading them. Robinoke 17:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

agreed Htaccess 06:52, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Most of these games are multiplayer only. If they all are, it might suffice to put a comment saying that in the introduction. If some have a single-player campaign or support playing against AI bots, that should be mentioned.

Several games mentioned do have single player mode (Cube, Sauerbraten, AssaultCube, Nexuiz, Hidden & Dangerous, Dinohunters, Kuma/War, OpenArena, ShootOut, Starsiege: Tribes, War§ow and X Operations, as far as I could learn from the respective articles). Could someone with more edditing experience than myself enter an additional column for that in the table? I think that is interesting information to have. Mcampos69 (talk) 12:08, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Added "Single/Multiplier" comment to the "Notes" column. Source: Wikipedia articles for each game Mcampos69 (talk) 11:08, 27 November 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Other

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Hidden and dangerous cover-01.jpg

Image:Hidden and dangerous cover-01.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] When do you plan to have a real list of FREE FPS ?????

This should be named "Your List of free first person shooters that you like", get real and make a real list of Free FPS. Or take this page down! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.226.74.105 (talk) 16:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

But that would give the impression that the only criteria would be that whoever was editing at the time had to like the game(s), and that's not right. It would also give the impression that the list was owned by someone, which again wouldn't be suitable. If you really wanted a rename I guess "List of notable free first-person shooters" would be a possibility, but the notion of notability is kind of implicit in most lists of this kind. Hope this helps, have a nice day. --Lijnema (talk) 18:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, "notable" goes without saying. It's a list of free FPSs that have wikipedia articles; it's a navigation tool rather than a directory of every FPS game that exists. Marasmusine (talk) 08:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Still just a list that the people editing wikipedia like. Only notalble to the editor. There are lots of games more popular and notable not on your list, because you never heard of them. As I have never heard of some of the games on your list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.226.74.105 (talk) 19:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
No, only notable per the wikipedia guidelines on notability. --Lijnema (talk) 00:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I read the, wikipedia guidelines on notability, but dont see them in action here. What I do see, is still a list of person favorite FPS games96.226.74.105 (talk) 01:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I don't think the "Free first-person shooter game engines" section belongs in this article

I don't think this should be in this article. People who are looking for free first person shooters are not likely to be searching for engines too. I do believe, however, that this section should have it's own page, once more information is gathered on the subject. 216.243.131.12 00:48, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Description of Changes

[edit] Ch ch ch ch changes

I'm converting this list to an actual list (in table format). I'm hoping this will cut down on the original research and promotional tone used in some of these entries. MarašmusïneTalk 15:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk page reorganization

Hi, I have done a fairly major reorg of the structure of the talk page, I tried not to change anyones contributions too much. I hope that its easier to navigate now. Htaccess 06:13, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TrueCombat: Elite

Why isn't "TrueCombat: Elite" [4] included on this list? --Merrick79 18:22, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

As stated above, this list is for standalone games, not mods. --Noerrorsfound 10:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)


AssaultCube is a mod of Cube!! But must be someone editing this page likes it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.226.74.105 (talk) 01:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Here is a quote off the cube web site "AssaultCube is probably the best Cube "mod" ever created. It comes with all new content and is playable as a standalone game. The gameplay provides a more "realistic" gameplay experience than Cube, featuring more modern weaponry and environments. Many gameplay modes are provided including CTF." See the word mod, the best Cube "mod"!!

Instead of complaining to some non-existant authority, why not remove the entry with something like "rm AssultCube. It's a mod, not a full game" in the edit summary? Perhaps a note on the talk page about the reasons for the removal if you want to be extra super careful. --Lijnema (talk) 00:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
AssaultCube does not require the original Cube game to play, so it qualifies as a full game because it is standalone. In contrast, TrueCombat:Elite will refuse to run if you don't have Enemy Territory installed. --Noerrorsfound (talk) 21:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


Its more of a battle trying to get something in Wikipedia and out of Wikipedia. Sorry you see it as complaining, I only say it as a observation. 96.226.74.105 (talk) 01:47, 2 February 2008 (UTC)