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.
What was wrong with the old cabinet picture? Why that one wasn't free? --Mika1h (talk) 16:52, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
See its deletion discussion and deletion review. The previous one was a non-free image of the cabinet taken from an advertisement flyer. According to Commons' definition of free, anything that's copyrightable on the object, like the artwork on the cabinet and the screen game on the monitor, makes the whole object ineligible for a free image. So a free version cannot exist. But apparently, a "more free" equivalent of the copyrighted material was possible, and thus NFCC#1 was not satisfied. Basically, the non-free image did meet WP:NFCC even though a free equivalent is impossible to exist. Not at all to my liking, but consensus is consensus. (Guyinblack25talk 17:29, 31 October 2009 (UTC))
Not very good pics. I think the best bet is to seek out and contact people who have taken pictures of these cabinets that exist either in personal collections or places they've been to, such as this author. That's what I've done with pictures of the cabinets we have every year at the Midwest Gaming Classic such as with my screenshot of Avalanche. It may also actually be beneficial to get a working relationship going between KLOV and the video game project as well since many of their cabinet images are user contributed photos. If permission can be recieved to duplicate KLOV photos here, with full credit for the source and a statement of permission, I think that would solve this issue across the board rather than just this specific article. Lastly, we can also start a specific "video game cabinet image project" at the video game project. Asking group members to get involved in taking usefull pictures of coin-ops at locations to start building our own database of non-commercial images. I'm thinking solutions that help solve this problem across the board would be better than one off ones for a specific article. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 20:28, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
I just sent an email off to the owners of KLOV explaining the situation and proposing what I outlined above. Hopefully it works out. I'm still thinking we should also start up the project I suggested above. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 20:51, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
What happened to the secret water maze part?
Why was this deleted? It did exist in the computer port version (Commodore/C64 and Apple 2). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Antdude (talk • contribs) 00:14, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Good article. My only gripe is, why does this article make it sound like only the arcade version of this game exists? There are several ports of Marble Madness, and there used to be a small gallery of pictures of the different ports. I personally wouldn't mind again seeing pictures of the different versions so that people can tell them apart. I don't know if this article needs to be split; would "Marble Madness (ports)" be a good article, or "Marble Madness (alternate versions)"? Maybe neither. All I know is that the other versions aren't even mentioned, like the NES one that has the catchy music by David Wise, who would one day compose Donkey Kong Country music. I want to see if anyone else thinks we should have other versions at the very least actually mentioned--even if all that was there was a listing of the different ports. Regards, 18.104.22.168 (talk) 22:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Whoops! Disregard the majority of what I just said! I didn't notice the image at the top was an NES image! Though it still would be nice to mention the other ports that were available, if possible--and keep the idea of the pictures of the other ports handy. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 22:30, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
The article does not currently mention Ballance, which was published by Atari and is generally agreed to be a 2000s clone of Marble Madness. Where could this fit in?--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 18:07, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
The Ballance article only refers to MM as being "similar", not a "clone" -- I'm not disputing your claim of "general agreement" on it being a clone (not my area of expertise), but before publishing such a claim we need to have some verification in reliable sources. Do you have some we could use to source this link and add it to both articles? //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 17:18, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
This has been added, because like Marble Blast Gold and Super Monkey Ball it is similar enough to be described as being in the same genre. It is also notable that Atari released the game, as they released the original Marble Madness. The YouTube videos of people playing Ballance (eg here) show the similarity. Ballance never became as well known as it should have done, mainly because it was released for PC only and never ported to the consoles.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 08:53, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
A few things-
Marble Blast and Super Monkey Ball were listed as examples as cited in ref 2: Grannell, Craig (August 2008). "The Making of Marble Madness". Retro Gamer (Imagine Publishing) (53): 82–87.
I don't put much into the fact that Atari published the game, because another company developed it. If Atari commissioned the game, then that would be another story. Still not much of story in my opinion, but a notable fact.
All that being said, however, the similarities are obviously there. "See also" sections are intended for links to related articles that are not already in an related. Something similar is in Joust: Joust (video game)#See also. I think this, and any other clone really, would be a perfect addition to such a section. Thoughts? (Guyinblack25talk 15:13, 29 November 2010 (UTC))
So should it be changed to a see also? I'm not going to argue over this.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 15:26, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
I think that is the simplest and best solution. But I wanted to get your thoughts on the matter. The other solution is to find another reliable source to support the claim that it is similar to Marble Madness. That can keep it in the article prose. (Guyinblack25talk 15:34, 29 November 2010 (UTC))
One user keeps deleting the External KLOV link to Marble Madness. There are two versions of MM. Marble Madness and Marble Madness 2, so these are two separate references and links. Please do not delete the original MM link. The fact that the link is already in use under the References section is of no consequence for the External links section, as readers cannot be expected to read through all footnotes. Asav (talk) 09:28, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
That user would be me. Per Wikipedia:EL#References and citation, webpages used as a citation in the article should not be external links as well, and the KLOV link does not match one of the exceptions listed in the guideline. In regard to you comment above, I disagree with the reasoning. If readers can't be expected to read though footnotes, then why should they be expected to look at the external links? The pertinent information is already in the article prose, and the references and external links provide further information for those that wish to pursue it. (Guyinblack25talk 15:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC))