Talk:Index of DOS games

Video games List‑class 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

List

This article has been rated as List-class on the project's quality scale.

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

Ghosts (Pac-Man) (1 participant)
Midnight.works (1 participant)
Revenge of the Killer Robots from Hell (2 participants)
Vette (Star Wars) (3 participants)
International Hobo (1 participant)
Wally Scharold (4 participants)
Cake Mania (series) (1 participant)
Omocat (5 participants)
Do You Like Horny Bunnies? (17 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Good project

This seems like an interesting project, and I wouldn't mind helping in my spare time. I added some info to 0-9, changed the formatting and put game names in bold so that the Publisher name would be easier to tell apart from the game name, and changed the order a little (according to what I hear lists should have numbers in this order; 4 007 1987 20000). I hope you don't mind the changes, and in that case I am sorry, but this seems interesting. After a while though I think this should either be split into List of MS-DOS games: 1984 with alfabetic sorting under there, or List of MS-DOS games: F with sorting by year under that. If not this list will get very long. Anyhow, great idea. Clq 19:06, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for the help, it's much appreciated. I didn't quite realise how huge the list would become when I started. As far as splitting the list goes, it's probably a good idea. Of course, the ideal situation is that all the red links will become filled, and the list will become redundant (everything will be in ). As it is, categories only contain articles that actually exist, so the list is a good way of seeing what actually exists and what doesn't. Sorry, this has turned into more of a ramble than a constructive comment. --Lucian Gregory 21:00, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The next days I will probably be mostly busy with real life stuff, in fact I will probably be busy most of this week, but what would be the best way.. One could probably just continue putting on the main page one letter at the time, and in some free time just move them over to pages for each year. I suggest using the List of MS-DOS games: 1984 format, as that seems to be used in quite some of the other lists. Perhaps tomorrow morning I could sort 0-9 into year page for example. It might be better to actually finish off with the info on the main page, and move when everything in a letter is fully done. And perhaps if one gets tired of inputing info/moving one could create a stub for a random red game ;P. This is obviously quite a long term project (was it 4000 games or so?), so if you can think of another good way of orgenizing, that would of course be nice also. Clq 21:46, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think for the time being, we should continue to input info into the main page, as having everything in one list makes it easier to quickly check whether or not a game is already listed. Definitely a long term project - even just listing the majority of games will take a long time - and I've been breaking up the monotony of listing by occasionally editing an existent article (I'm new, and don't feel entirely confident about creating articles yet).

As for organization, sorting into the List of MS-DOS games: 1984 format seems to me to be the best way. Sorting by letter would still result in fairly huge lists, and sorting by genre is tricky (and inevitably controversial). Anyway, I'll see if I can get everything up to the end of C in tonight. --Lucian Gregory 23:05, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Really cool project but it looks like you have your work cut out for you :). I'll try to help out when possible. rCX (talk) 03:50, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Progress

We are now up to page 44 / 142 on the MobyGames list (1098 out of 3536 entries). --Lucian Gregory 00:43, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Up to page 50 Clq 09:01, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page 56 --Lucian Gregory 16:12, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Interactive Fiction

I have removed 9:05 from the list, as it is not specific to any system; rather, it will run on any system for which there is a Z-Code interpreter (for example, it could be run on a Dreamcast using FrotzDC). I would suggest that games written using Hugo, TADS, Inform, AGT, Alan or Glulx should not be added to the list.

This site might be the best source for PC / DOS specific interactive fiction, although many of the games in that list were created using one of the aforementioned utilities. --Lucian Gregory 23:41, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

Apologies for starting this project and then apparently abandoning it halfway through. PC / connection troubles have kept me busy for quite some time now. Things should be back to normal now, so expect to see a bit more progress. A very tentative hope is to at least have all the games listed by the end of next week.

On that note, I notice the page is getting rather long. Any suggestions on the best way to split it? I'm thinking something like "List of MS-DOS games (A)", with a navbar on each page.

Length is really not much of an issue for a page like this, in my opinion. Splitting it up would just make it harder to update all at once. Ideally this is a temporary page, as eventually the goal would be to create articles for every notable game and organize them in categories by release date. Until then, it's a work in progress (like most lists). --- RockMFR 07:40, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the pages for the DOS games themselves

I think under "external links" for the pages for the DOS games themselves, there should be a site in which the game can be downloaded if it is legal and possible to do so. If it isn't, and there's a legal demo (or shareware) version, then that should be included. But only when it's legal :P

What do you think?

Yoda921 02:51, 11 February 2007 (UTC)Yoda[reply]

Non MS-DOS game

Unreal isn't a MS-DOS game. It should be removed from the list.207.13.77.56 20:33, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are probably thinking about Unreal by Epic Games. But there's also an MS-DOS Ubi Soft Unreal game [1].Calvero2 11:09, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think Caesar II i either! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.153.204.116 (talk) 03:08, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Expansions/Speech patches

The list also has some Speech patches for games! I think the article needs reorganisation. -- Magioladitis 12:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work

Great resource, thanks for all the work that's gone into it. Drutt (talk) 05:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice to have categories. Such as "Adventure", "Action", ect. To make it easier to locate a game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.41.144 (talk) 00:45, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes. It would be nice. It would be nice if every game came out with neatly assigned, industry-agreed-on genres. And, admittedly, most games aim for a particular genre. But not all. Games have been known to cross genre lines, incorporating multiple genres into a single game. Heck, games have been known to *introduce* new genres, often unwittingly. (One game may introduce a few new concepts to an existing genre, and a whole new genre is built off of the new concepts)

The point: Defining genre is not as clear-cut as one would like. And, often, finding resources that accurately reflect the true genre of the game is even more difficult -- especially for games that came out before sites like gamefaqs and allgame were established.

Needs Organization

Seems like this page has been paid attention to less than other lists of games. Perhaps it should be redesigned into a table, similar to how List of Xbox games or List of Games for Windows titles is set up? Unless there's a massive amount of opposition, I'll likely just go ahead and do some of it to start it off. --Raikuson (talk) 01:39, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's only partially in table format now... looks kinda bad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.236.151.123 (talk) 02:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs to be split

The article is greater than 181 KB and the page is very slow to load, not to mention to edit or clean-up. Need help from expert editor spliters!--Funandtrvl (talk) 21:58, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How much do you think it needs to be split by? "List of MS-DOS games (A to M)" or "List of MS-DOS games starting with A"? inclusivedisjunction (talk) 19:19, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rule of thumb is about 30 KB per page. So, you've got about 6 times that already. It's difficult to estimate the splits because a) much of the table is not filled in, throwing off the size of the current table, and b) I suspect that this is list is nowhere near complete -- splits performed off an incomplete list may need adjustment as the list fills out in the future.

That said, the following looks like a relatively fair split, assuming all parts of the list are equally incomplete:

0-B (2778 lines)

C-E (2381 lines)

F-J (2690 lines)

K-M (2227 lines)

N-R (2500 lines)

S (2206 lines)

T-Z (2558 lines)

Dawynn (talk) 13:07, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked the length of "0 - B", and it would be over 38 KB. I'm going to say "better safe than sorry" and probably try to plan it to be be split by individual letter, barring a couple groups of letters being smaller than 30 KB even combined. Unless someone has better plans, since it's been over six months. inclusivedisjunction (talk) 12:26, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Other than some slight ugliness with the TOC, I think everyone'll be a lot happier with the result. inclusivedisjunction (talk) 16:22, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Thanks Inclusivedisjunction. -- œ ^™ 05:48, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for splitting it! rCX (talk) 21:00, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's with all the Windows 95 games in the list?

Is this a list of MS-DOS games or what? There shouldn't be any Windows 95-only games listed, unless there's both a DOS and Windows version of the game. I think I also noticed several shareware games on the list, (VGA Miner etc.) this list should contain commercial software only. -- œ ^™ 07:35, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since when are shareware games not commercial? inclusivedisjunction (talk) 11:27, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok but can this list really accommodate the huge number of shareware games as well? -- œ ^™ 18:43, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's already a proposal to split the list off into more manageable chunks. I see no reason why additional games couldn't be added ad-infinitum. inclusivedisjunction (talk) 11:51, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well there should definately be a separate list for shareware games list only... as big and unmanageable that list would be.. good luck.. - œ ^™ 02:30, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Almost all games of that era had a shareware version of their full retail game. There's probably little point in isolating such games. inclusivedisjunction (talk) 11:39, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]