Talk:Flappy Bird

Semi-protected edit request on 6 February 2014

Can someone edit the page to mention that Flappy Bird is also on Windows Phone. As a matter of fact, its still available on the Windows Platform http://www.windowsphone.com/en-us/store/app/flappy-bird/9bf76692-f5ca-4a5f-a533-2ce0d9c0e6e1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.171.13.95 (talk) 17:58, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Change "adverts" in the "Objective" section to the non-slag "advertisements;" maybe throw in an Oxford comma.

Epamek 03:41, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

No need for an Oxford comma. I've deslanged the word, though.--Launchballer 08:25, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Problem with context

Hi. I'd like to point out an issue with this article, which I believe may be an extremely problematic issue with one source.

Currently the article states

"Some have suspected that the developers have used bots to cause its sudden rise in popularity at the start of 2014.[13] When questioned on this by The Daily Telegraph, Nguyen refused to answer.[14]"

This makes it sound as if there is some kind of nefarious activity going on. However if you look at the source in question, it actually reads

"When asked by The Telegraph if he'd like to say anything about the speculation surrounding his app, Mr Nguyen declined. He said: "I respect all other people opinions. I won't give any comment to this article. I'd like to make my games in peace." [sic]4

In this context it sounds more like he's not making any comment about the game at all, which sounds more reasonable. This might be a case of weasel wording. I don't know, I want to reach a consensus before taking any sort of action here. Deathawk (talk) 06:55, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

I think you're right, Deathawk. Go for it. --BDD (talk) 20:27, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Taking down the game

The creator tweeted today that he's going to be taking down the game. Here is the tweet: https://twitter.com/dongatory/status/432227971173068800 --Matt723star (talk) 22:23, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Here are some sources:

• http://kotaku.com/i-am-sorry-flappy-bird-users-22-hours-from-now-i-will-1518959784
• http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/8/5393208/flappy-bird-creator-says-hes-pulling-the-game-offline-tomorrow
• http://gizmodo.com/wait-what-flappy-bird-creator-is-removing-the-game-1518969676

Bananasoldier (talk) 02:32, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

More sources:

• http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/02/08/flappy-bird--online-reaction/5328159/
• http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2014/02/08/flappy-bird-creator-says-hes-taking-the-game-down/
• http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/technology/live-reaction-flappy-bird-taken-3127938
• http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-flappy-bird-removed-app-store-developer-tweet-20140208,0,3014925.story#axzz2sqWDCWF2

Sources exploded overnight! Bananasoldier (talk) 17:16, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Even more sources:

• http://newsfeed.time.com/2014/02/09/flappy-bird-shut-down-dong-nguyen/
• http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2014/02/09/the-flappy-bird-shutdown-is-a-diabolical-or-accidental-genius-act-of-marketing/
• http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-casti/flappy-bird-marathon-played-8-hours_b_4746747.html

Bananasoldier (talk) 18:27, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Bananasoldier, the reason I haven't incorporated those is because they largely expand on the tweets (which we can do!), there's not much new information there. Plus the Mirror, which you have repeated, is not a reliable source because it specializes in red-top tabloid journalism.--Launchballer 19:13, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining, as well as pointing out the Mirror. Bananasoldier (talk) 19:36, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 09 February 2014

Edit from: "It was originally released in May 2013 for the iPhone 5, then updated for iOS6 and later in September 2013.", to "It was originally released in May 2013 for the iPhone 5, then updated for iOS6 later in September 2013." by deleting the word "and" or make it "and later updated for iOS6 in September 2013". — Preceding unsigned comment added by SubSonny (talk • contribs) 08:01, 9 February 2014‎ (UTC)

Edit comment on 09 February 2014

'The game has also been criticized by Kotaku for its open use of Mario artifacts, referring to it as "ripped-off art".' This Kotaku article was erroneous - the graphics were not directly ripped from Mario. The article now has an update clarifying that "Flappy Bird's pipe is a new albeit unoriginal drawing". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.0.19 (talk) 11:49, 9 February 2014‎ (UTC)

A suggestion on February 10 2014

In the Development Section, "Nguyen claims that no part of any of his games was designed to be impossible." "was" should be changed to "were". — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheInformativePanda (talk • contribs) 02:56, 10 February 2014‎ (UTC)

I disagree. "was" is referring to the singular word "part." Remove "of any his games" and it would be "Nguyen claims that no part were designed..." which is grammatically incorrect. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 03:00, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

I do see what you were referring to, thank you for clarifying. TheInformativePanda (talk) 03:06, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

A suggestion on February 13 2014

Can someone edit the page to mention that Flappy Bird is also on Windows Phone. As a matter of fact, its still available on the Windows Platform http://www.windowsphone.com/en-us/store/app/flappy-bird/9bf76692-f5ca-4a5f-a533-2ce0d9c0e6e1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.165.72 (talk) 21:24, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

A site called Windows Phone Central (presumably not a reliable source) has an article that says Nguyen (Flappy Bird's author) was working to port the game, having Tweeted “I could estimate 10 days from now. It has to be approved by Microsoft”, but he removed the games before finishing. The article says Microsoft's site has a clone of Flappy Bird, which it describes as “a rip”, but it isn't clear if they mean it's an exact independently-coded clone (copying the name, logo, and graphics), or if it's a translation or interpreted version from the binaries of another version. It also says Microsoft was informed of the illegal copy, but so far has not responded. PC Advisor and IB Times indicates the publisher of the copy is “IG Mobile”, and IB Times notes that it's not the original version by Nguywen, but neither article gives further details. SlashGear mentions both this copy of the game, and another very similar clone available for Windows Phone, iOS, and Android called Birdy Flap. ––Agyle (talk) 09:02, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Take down

I came to this article to get a sense of why the game had been discontinued and I didn't really have a clear picture after reading the article. It quotes the Nguyen as saying "I cannot take this anymore." Further down the article there is reference to criticism about graphics and difficulty but I am only guessing that this might connected to what it is that Nguyen can't take. Clarification on this point would help the article Tullyis (talk) 03:37, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I've done research myself and could not find an explanation. I don't think anyone really knows the legitimate reason why he discontinued the game. Does anyone have any sources (other than the ones currently on the page) that prove otherwise? Meatsgains (talk) 04:00, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

An article from IGN states that (paraphrased here) the creator said the product has become addictive, which is against he original intention, so it prevent it from becoming an even bigger problem in people's lives he decided to pull the game. "I cannot take this anymore", according to the source, comes from this guilt of creating such a problem. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 16:16, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I recently stumbled upon this article as well. [1] Might be of some use. Meatsgains (talk) 19:35, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Is vs. was

There have been many edits conflicting over "Flappy Bird is a mobile game" vs "Flappy Bird was a mobile game." The latter is incorrect according to the manual of style, as the word 'was' indicates the product has ceased to exist or has never released. Whether or not the game is still available for purchase does not change the fact that the software exists and was released. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 04:39, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree. The game still exists and is still being played. Thus, using the word 'is' is adequate. Meatsgains (talk) 04:48, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

It still exists. There are millions of copies in use every day. Do we refer to a movie in past tense when it's no longer in distributions? - Richfife (talk) 04:40, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

WP:TENSE applies. The game can still be played by the millions of people that have already downloaded and installed it. STATic message me! 04:52, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

While the game (does) exist, it is not publicly available anymore, hence, it 'was.' To appease both the 'is's' and 'wad's' (!?!), might I recommend changing the sentence 2 read like this; '..is a game ...which was publicly available, but, is no longer...'UNOwenNYC (talk) 16:19, 21 February 2014 (UTC)UNOWENNYC

I think that's covered pretty well in the body of the article. - Richfife (talk) 18:28, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Discontinuation dates inconsistent

In the article summary it states that the discontinuation date was February 10, 2014 - although later in the article it says it was discontinued on February 9, 2014. Probably an issue with time zones. -789it789- (talk) 18:56, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

HTML5 Web versions

Many web versions are close replicas of the original in HTML5, for example this version and this version (both are made in HTML 5). I think it would be informative to include these as external links so that people can see what the game is like as done in this article on BusinessInsider.

Reader feedback: add more pictures is a good idea

219.79.45.229 posted this comment on 16 February 2014 (view all feedback).

add more pictures is a good idea

This would be a pretty good idea; maybe we could (under fair use) get some screenshots, as we currently don't have any?

Jc86035 (talk • contributions) 15:20, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 February 2014

Please change The removal has spawned remakes and parodies of the game, such as the web-based Flappy Doge, the mutliplayer FlapMMO, Flappy Plane, Flappy Whale, Flappy Penguin, Flappy Angry Bird, Flappy Bert, and Fall Out Bird.[21][22][23]

to The removal has spawned remakes and parodies of the game, such as the web-based Flappy Doge, the mutliplayer FlapMMO, Flappy Plane, Flappy Whale, Flappy Penguin, Flappy Angry Bird, Flappy Bert, Fall Out Bird, and Happy Bird.[21][22][23]

and link happy bird to this page: http://protected-forest-6868.herokuapp.com/

(it's the best clone out there. I made it) TylerLangan (talk) 03:43, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

 Not done Per WP:COI and WP:NOTADVERTISING. Wikipedia articles are not for advertising your product. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 04:12, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Not done: I'm thinking that list should be trimmed down to the three most well known anyways, as more than that is pushing Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 04:14, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

As a regular contributor to this article I've nominated it for GA. It certainly seems stable and balanced due to the protection, and covers all bases from the brief supernova life of the game in a neutral manner. The Almightey Drill (talk) 16:46, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Last level

Does anyone know what's the last level possible? I saw a video on Youtube of Flappy Bird meeting Mario in level 999 however Mario seems to kill him, there is another video of the bird ending the game in level 9,999... does anyone know anything about it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.240.66.109 (talk) 21:18, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Those videos are fan-made animations. The game simply continues. Also WP:NOTFORUM. The Almightey Drill (talk) 00:10, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Save Flappy Bird Movement

I originally tried to edit the aerticle to include some info on the whole "Save Flappy Bird thing", but it got reverted constantly. I've been told that the link to the biggest petition to Save flappy bird (www.save-flappybird.com) is not confirmed biggest, that it's still subject to debates and coversations on the talk wall. So, here we are: should I add the "save flappy bird" segment to the article, and any ideas on how I can prove the petition is really the biggest, considering it was never mentioned in any media, same as any other petitions? Batminem (talk) 11:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)Batminem

Never mentioned in the media. You've answered yourself there. The Almightey Drill (talk) 12:44, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

But it soes not mean it is not the biggest one. Any other suggestions on how to make it right? Batminem (talk) 13:01, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Find sources that cover this petition. Prove through verifiable, reliable sources that the petition is as big as you claim. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 16:31, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

One raging response against flappy bird is not mentioned

Squishy bird is a web based game launched in response to show anger. The facebook page was also launched, which has more than 1 lakh likes to date. According to facebook page the purpose of game is, "Do you HATE that freakin' bird? Do you have nightmares about his stupid face? Get revenge NOW by squishing him in Squishy Bird." The game requires space bar key to be pressed in order to squish the bird that tries to pass the pipes. Birds are auto controlled and once a bird passes the pipe, game is over. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vivek201 (talk • contribs) 13:57, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Are you suggesting we add this in? If so, it does not belong. Meatsgains (talk) 17:15, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Flappy Bird/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Newyorkadam (talk · contribs) 22:50, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this shortly. It is a pretty good game, I think overrated however :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 22:50, 24 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam

Quick-glance comments:

• 'Dong Nguyen' is wikilinked, and the wikilink redirects to this article. Please unwikilink him or create a new article for him.
  • He previously had an article. Now it is merged. I've unlinked him now :) The Almightey Drill (talk) 23:19, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
• Solid 44 references.
• No broken links :)

Comments:

• "Flappy Bird is a 2013 mobile game notorious for its difficulty level." It's notorious for many things, not just its difficulty level. Either add in some other things it's notorious for (like being pulled off the app store, or people being killed over the game).
• "The bird briefly flaps upward each time the player taps the screen, and falls due to gravity otherwise." I suggest changing this to, "The bird briefly flaps upward each time the player taps the screen. If the screen is not tapped, the bird falls due to gravity."
• "In January 2014, it topped the Free Apps chart in the US and Chinese App Stores,[9][10] and later on that month" Please change 'later on that month' to 'later that month'
• In Nguyen's quote from Twitter, he didn't italicize 'Flappy Bird', he put apostrophes around it. We don't want to misquote ;)
• "Nguyen's other games include Super Ball Juggling and Shuriken Block, ranked at 6th and 18th respectively, at the App Store as of early February 2014." I think this should be moved from the 'Discontinuation' section to the 'Legacy' section, it seems moar fitting. Also, please change the sentence to: 'Nguyen's other games, Super Ball Juggling and Shuriken Block, ranked at 6th and 18th respectively during early February 2014.'
• Please rename the 'Critical reception' section to 'Reception', considering both positive and negative reviews are given.
  • I did this, but criticism also refers to any act of being a critic or reviewer. Just to let you know :) The Almightey Drill (talk) 10:50, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
• "The game was also criticized by Kotaku for its open use of Mario artifacts," please reword this to (and wikilink Kotaku), "The game was also criticized by Kotaku, a video game blog, for its open use of Mario artifacts,"
• "as well as that its primary gameplay mechanic was a “rip off” from a game called Helicopter Game," was a ripoff? Shouldn't this be present tense, so it is a ripoff?
• Please add Nguyen's website (http://www.dotgears.com) as an External link.

This looks like a promising Good Article. Please fix the above :)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Nothing is said about the deaths and violence the game has caused.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	There are changes every day to the article, but that is because it is a very popular game right now. The article is semi-protected.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	The logo of the game is copyright, but is fair use. The screenshot of the game is also fair use. An image of Dong Nguyen, the creator of Flappy Bird, would be nice.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Final decision comment: Passed! Nice article, happy to review :-) -Newyorkadam (talk) 20:44, 25 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam

GA response

I'm not convinced that this article is up to the GA standard, primarily due to prose quality. Rather than a formal GAR, which takes forever, I've brought it up for outside opinion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Flappy Bird GA. --PresN 22:18, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

I dispute 6a at the very least - rationales are not complete/invalid, reviewer apparently didn't even look at them, relevant fields read only "n.a." Яehevkor ✉ 11:11, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Android imitators are still available on Google Play!

This article makes several claims that there are no Flappy Bird imitators on the official Google Play store. It says that " both Apple and Google have removed games from their app stores for being too similar to the original", and "Android users should “download apps and games only from the Google Play store, which means not downloading any games that claim to be Flappy Bird."" - I just checked, and there are over 30 blatant Flappy Bird clones available on the Android Google Play store, most from early February. Clearly none of them have been removed. Many of them have swarms of negative user reviews citing malware and spyware, and they are still available on the official google play store. The claims that you'll be safe if you only stick to the Google Play store, and that you can't find Flappy Bird clones on the Google Play store, are completely false. moeburn (talk) 13:55, 5 March 2014 (UTC)