Talk:Role-playing game creation software

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

Emote (2 participants)
Stardew Valley Guidebook (2 participants)
Train simulator (disambiguation) (8 participants)
Preston Arsement (4 participants)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)
Melee (game terminology) (5 participants; relisted)
Godzilla: Monster of Monsters (5 participants; relisted)
Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (5 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

What advertising?

Someone's flagged this with "This article or section is written like an advertisement". Wouldn't that be more an appropriate concern for a page that was about say, one company's product or products, rather than a generic class of product? If it literally is just something being said about RPG Makers collectively, I can't really see what, nor why anybody should care. If it was something about one of the specific products, I can't see anything egregious there either, sorry. If I had to criticise the page, it'd be that it could do with more interesting content, such as describing what most of them involve and what variations there are. --195.92.168.163 04:27, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bias for RPGds

States that it is a "Great Project, very powerful". "Easy to install..." "For more information please see the link in 'external links' section". I feel this is too biased and feels like and ad. Fixed and link set up similar to ReelFeelengine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.87.170.105 (talk) 22:42, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Eclipse

I removed this section for lack of notability, at least no more than any other program on this list. Was written as an advertisement and offers no more functionality than others. All claims based on opinion. Also adding it to the links. ---JamesWill (talk) 06:29, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

last link is dead

remove it? find new version? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.174.112.175 (talk) 06:23, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blades of Exile? Yura87 (talk) 18:52, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Blades of Exile and its slightly more advanced variant for Avernum series, are RPG makers for Windows. And, Adventure Construction Set was a RPG maker.

External links

This article lists a large number of very obscure programs and packages. I recently reverted the addition of an engine called DragonSource, based on a link which only included a forum with one post and a list of downloads with no documentation. While this is unusually flimsy, I'm sure this isn't the only weak entry here. This list doesn't necessarily have to be limited to software with existing articles, but there does need to be some criteria beyond just having a website, otherwise this becomes a source of spam or worse. I don't think DragonSource is malevolent, but it's hard to say with total confidence, and it would be far too easy for spam or malware to slip through the cracks on a list like this. Grayfell (talk) 03:33, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone through and removed all the in-article external links. I know this is kind of a pain in the butt, but there was already a spam problem, and this kind of linking should be avoided for this and other reasons, per WP:EL. I've also deleted a large number of entries. This is very imprecise, but basically I removed any if, after a Google search, I didn't get the impression that they were used to make actual games. Some of them were vaporware, or looked promising, but had 0 signs of an active community, while some are still in development and haven't been released yet. Some of them... maybe? This is why independent sources are so much better for this kind of thing, per WP:WTAF. Any other suggestions on how to clean this up, I'm all ears. Grayfell (talk) 05:09, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]