Talk:List of strategy video games

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Knight chess piece This article is within the scope of WikiProject Strategy games, an effort by several users to improve Wikipedia articles on strategy 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.
Top This article is on a subject of Top priority within strategy games for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.

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.
Mid This article is on a subject of Mid priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.

Contents

[edit] Expansions

I like how the list is organized, where one asterisk (*) is used for single games or series titles, and two for series games. However, expansions are also given two asterisks, thus placing them at the same level with the main game. I think this might be confusing to most people; I suggest adding three asterisks for expansions (as I did with the Total War series):

*''[[Total War (video game series)|Total War]]'' series
**''[[Shogun: Total War]]''
**''[[Medieval: Total War]]''
***''[[Medieval: Total War#Expansion pack factions|Medieval: Total War: Viking Invasion]]''
**''[[Rome: Total War]]''
***''[[Rome Total War: Barbarian Invasion|Rome: Total War: Barbarian Invasion]]''
***''[[Rome: Total War#"Alexander" expansion|Rome: Total War: Alexander]]''
**''[[Medieval II: Total War]]''

which produces:

I think this is clearer, and might be a good way to present the expansions. Any comments? · AO Talk 22:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, sounds good. I might not go back and fix them myself; so if you spot any expansions please expand them. SharkD 22:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Sure thing. I'll probably be back tomorrow to help some more. · AO Talk 00:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm also treating game remakes in the same way as expansions. SharkD 19:32, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New section

I added a section (as well as a category) for MMO strategy games. SharkD 05:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sub-genres

Should I add sections for strategy sub-genres, such as 4x games and grand strategy games? SharkD 04:07, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Sure, but add them as sub-sections, that way its not confusing. · AO Talk 17:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
I can't add them as subsections, as there are both real-time and turn-based examples. SharkD 20:07, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Slow Progress

I'm slowly going through every strategy game in the MobyGames database and either adding them to this list or to the Puzzle games list. I'm currently at letter G in the alphabet. I would appreciate some help. Please pick a letter of the alphabet (after G) and double-check them against this list. SharkD 21:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I got as far as letter M and am thinking of quitting. SharkD 18:00, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
By all means don't sicken yourself. Thanks for the work you've been putting in.QuagmireDog 23:19, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List too large

Is the list too large? Should it be split into several lists? SharkD 18:01, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

At some point I'd say definitely, the puzzle/maze section in particular has identical purpose to some individual lists on the 'list of video games by genre' list.. thing which I've been fiddling with recently. QuagmireDog 23:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Though before exploding lists further perhaps several of us interested in videogames and these lists in particular could disucss the roles of each individual list, how and why they should overlap (if at all) and also what exact function the list of videogame genres should be filling. I got a good idea from the talk page there, and got stuck in since there were so many spam ELs, redlinks, messed-wikilinks etc, but I'd like some input. QuagmireDog 23:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand exactly what you're saying. SharkD 23:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] pfff, another tard wiki

Just put your favorite game, just say that "hey... my *overhyped game* is also a strategy game because he have some minor strategy stuff, so it's must be in this list".

Please, use the common sense, half of the games listed are not a strategy game but take SOME ASPECT of strategy. Or you could add almost any game since almost any game require to use a strategy to win (for example Pac-Man). --Magallanes 22:17, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Tactical shooters? Not exactly strategy... · AndonicO Talk 22:13, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
I used MobyGames as a guide when adding games to the list. All the games listed here belong to the Strategy category at MobyGames.SharkD 05:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of red links

You could behave more constructively by providing references to the red links instead of removing them. The games (for the most part) don't suffer from lack of notability--they've been released by commercial entities and reviewed by gaming publications. SharkD 05:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree, I don't really see the point of removing red links from a list, which should rather be complete. Maybe this should be undone. What do other people think? Spitfire ch 02:42, 23 October 2007 (CET)
Fine, whatever. Lord Dreamy § 00:48, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, Lord :) Spitfire ch 09:08, 23 October 2007 (CET)

[edit] Is the point of a list to be accurate or "look good"?

I don't believe "looking good" has significant weight when making edits to the list that correct misleading organization. This reversion was made on the grounds that it "looks better", even though the prior edit undid a presumptuous listing of Super Army War as belonging to a (fictitious) Rescue Raiders series. The latter was released by Sir-Tech in 1984, the former by Atlus in 2005. Though there are clear resemblances in gameplay, they do not form a series of any sort. I should think that it is more important to be accurate than pretty on WikiPedia. D. Brodale 00:22, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, what about the one game that, because of your edit was removed? Lord Dreamy § 02:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
No game was removed. I'm really not sure what you're talking about. D. Brodale 02:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
If you look in the diff, on games' entry was removed. Lord Dreamy § 02:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
It was Super Army War. Lord Dreamy § 02:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Please learn how to read a diff. Super Army War was lifted out from beneath Rescue Raiders and properly sorted alphabetically. It was never removed, and it's still on the list if you would happen to look. D. Brodale 02:17, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
The list should be accurate and not accomadate 'spiritual successors'. SharkD 04:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

pfff...Colobot listed as a strategy wargame...you kill some ants and control some vehicles(but not all together) and it's a wargame?...never seen such an idiotic list on wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.119.136.144 (talk) 13:29, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List too inaccurate

The sub-lists in this article are too inaccurate. Especially the RTS section is unaligned with other strategy games articles and a great number of its entries are miscategiorised. I think it would be better to transclude the specific (better, more accurate, more informational and sortable) tables of strategy games into this article rather than multiply the lists. Also, the Europa Universalis and Svea Rike games should be recategorised in their articles. Miqademus (talk) 15:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd add that the very name of this page is strikingly inaccurate: several of these games are NOT video games. That certainly applies to the "grand strategy" section. Those are "computer games." Solutions: rename the page "List of strategy video and computer games"; create two separate pages; or, split the page into two sections. To me, the ideal would be to rename the page and then divide so that there is a clear distinction. (Gil1970) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gil1970 (talkcontribs) 06:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sort by date

These games should be in some way also sorted by date. I dont think many people would be interested in playing the older games. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.1.133.113 (talk) 07:02, 6 March 2008 (UTC)