Talk:DarkSpace

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pictures[edit]

Can someone get pictures in here? AWP Lizard

FTL Defiance from the DarkSpace forums was kind enough to supply some screenshots. I have uploaded two that I felt best illustrated defining aspects of DarkSpace: factions, multiple ship types, and several players playing together. We might also look for screenshots that show things like prestige, special game events, or other defining qualities if you can think of any. If you have such screenshots but can't upload them just let me know! --Culix (talk) 15:25, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion notice[edit]

I object to this deletion. Much of the information written on this page was compiled and written by DarkSpace game staff (of which I am not). Further, DarkSpace has been reviewed by IGN, and I shall post a link to the review shortly. We need to discuss this further before any deletion is carried out.

Regards, Webmaster961 (talk) 22:38, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, saying that much was written by the staff is not in our favor, as it reeks of advertisement and bias. Though, the truth is that, as far as I can see the staff really hasn't contributed that much. I do believe that the article is notable, though- DarkSpace has been mentioned/reviewed by multiple major gaming review entities. What the article needs is one heck of a clean-up, it's way too embellished and reads more like a saga than an article. Will get on that if I have time in the near future...
For a decent list of reviews/mentions by notable review entities: http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/354593.asp
Kalthuras (talk) 23:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that all staff except the owner are volunteers just like everyone else here in Wikipedia.
I would say they did their best to put at least some useful information on here.
But as current darkspace has just underwent a major update, all lot of documentation will have to be changed, and we as players/supporters will make it known to volunteers who deal with PR and documentation to have this DS wikipedia page on their things to do list. Eledore (talk) 19:06, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the article should stay. I think DarkSpace is actually fairly noteworthy in the video game world. It's an MMO built mostly by a single developer; it's open source; it has retained a player base despite being nine years old and having only volunteer staff; it was good enough to get picked up by two seperate publishers (though one eventually dropped it); and it has been published to retail shelves. Not many games can claim all that.
I agree that the article needs cleaning and references though. As noted below I will be working on that over the next few weeks. --Culix (talk) 17:01, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs a lot of work.[edit]

I just removed the bulk of the article per WP:V, WP:OR, and WP:NOTGUIDE. I'd strongly suggest that any editors read WP:GAMECRUFT for what should and should not be included in this article. A lot of work still needs to be done. There are no citations throughout the article, only "References" at the end but with no clue as to which reference backs up which claim(s). Any editor would be justified in removing 99% of the text as original research. Does anyone who knows more about this game feel like diving in? Wyatt Riot (talk) 09:22, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've started finding some references and I will add them in as I have time. Thanks for the link to WP:GAMECRUFT. --Culix (talk) 08:52, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've copyedited the Development History section and tried to add several references. More are still needed. I have also temporarily removed some statements until we can find a good place for them (see the TODO list below). --Culix (talk) 22:28, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I did a copyedit on the Gameplay section, trying to make it shorter and more clear. Previously this was just a copy/paste of DarkSpace's 'about' page, which seems bad, both because it's a violation of copyright and because it reads more like an ad. It should be better now though. Only the Factions and Ship sections to go! :) --Culix (talk) 00:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, the article now has 16 citations from secondary sources and 15 from primary sources. I'm going to be bold and say that's enough to remove the citations notice. If you feel it is still lacking please post here with why. I will continue to work on the other sections; I have some game development material to post. --Culix (talk) 14:13, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article feedback[edit]

Okay, I have tried to improve the article to match the Video Game Article Guidelines. I think it still needs some copyediting, sources for statements, and some images. We may need an interview article for a reference. However, I need to take a break from looking at this article and come back with a clean slate. I am inviting any and all feedback on what still needs to be done. After I have discussed that and made a few more tweaks I will see about requesting a quality reassessment. --Culix (talk) 04:22, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Factions and Ships[edit]

I first tried simply giving the Factions section a small copyedit to make it smaller. But it still seemed rather unwieldly. The article guidelines state:

"Articles on video games should give an encyclopedic overview of a game and its importance to the industry. Readers should be presented with a concise overview of the game's plot and gameplay. ... Because the encyclopedia will be read by gamers and non-gamers alike, it is important not to clutter an article with a detailed description of how to play it or an excessive amount of non-encyclopedic trivia. A general rule of thumb to follow if unsure: If the content only has value to people actually playing the game, it is unsuitable."

This makes it seem like a large section with faction descriptions is inappropriate. With that in mind I cut things dramatically. But maybe its too much? Let me know what you think, or if the Factions section just needs to be expanded a tiny bit from here. Maybe we can instead talk more about how factions relate to gameplay in the larger perspective or something. --Culix (talk) 08:57, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I merged both Factions and Ships into the Gameplay section. I'll think on it. --Culix (talk) 09:35, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Single Programmer Since 2002"[edit]

In the text in this article, it says (just above the staff list) that there has been a single programmer since 2002, and yet, the staff list mentions several "developers". Does anybody else find this contradictory? I can't fix it because I don't know when those staff members joined, so I'd have to erase a large portion of it for it to make sense, which I don't want to do. JordyD (talk) 02:43, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Being a developer doesn't necessarily mean they're programmers. 77.102.241.71 (talk) 12:03, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Genre[edit]

The Genre listed for DarkSpace is "MMORST" (should be 'RTS' I believe). I'm not sure if this is an accepted acronym so I made the link point to both Massively_multiplayer_online_game and Real-time_strategy. Feel free to make MMORST a redirect to Massively_multiplayer_online_real-time_strategy if you can support that. --Culix (talk) 08:58, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction[edit]

I copyedited the intro to try and make it more clear. I think a shorter first sentence would be easier to understand. It used to say "DarkSpace is a massively multiplayer online real-time strategy computer game". If you are not familiar with the concepts of MMO, RTS, and/or computer game, that is quite a long sentence to digest. massively multiplayer online real-time strategy is a redirect to Massively multiplayer online game anyway, so I changed the link. Also, MMOs are usually online, so I took out the word "online". Now we have "DarkSpace is a massively multiplayer real-time strategy computer game". I hope that is easier to parse.

I'll think about it some more. Comments/contributions are welcome. --Culix (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Features[edit]

Moved from article, reads like a blurb. RJFJR (talk) 14:02, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Featuring 3D accelerated graphics using PaleStar's proprietary Medusa engine!

Command over 18 unique spacecraft and installations from the three warring factions!

Dynamic stereo rendered environmental sound, ranging from the crackling hum of alien particle beams splitting 5-kilometer capital ships in half to the frantic radio distress calls from allied ships on the verge of destruction!

Massive planets, asteroid fields, orbiting moons, brilliant stars, wormholes, and black holes rendered in beautiful detail!

Real time particle systems showing ship damage, torpedo impacts, nebulas and various other gorgeous effects will startle the senses!

Players subscribe and participate in massively multiplayer world shattering campaigns, receive dynamic content updates of new ship types, new races, technology, and strategies that will make the game virtually replayable.

Global Ranking boards keep an active career report on players: tracking ranks, achievements, kills, campaign wins and a host of other statistics and accolades, such as Merit badges, medals and commendations. Subscribing members only!

Team play capability supporting anywhere from 1 on 1 skirmishes to an all out 200-player grand scale war with a full host of capital ships, frigates, interceptors, multi-atmospheric bomber squadrons, orbiting battle platforms, stealth craft, marines boarding ships and assaulting planets. Zero- G commando units and over 25 unique weapons systems with each faction having its own specialized weapons!

Use the intuitive command system to send orders to subordinates, allowing player-to-player communications with a click of the mouse. View your ship status from the Engineering window, setting repair priorities and viewing the state of ship's systems and weapons!

The game play supports a variety of skill levels. New players will be commissioned on a smaller, less complicated craft learning how to handle basic tasks and eventually gaining prestige and rank to take on more responsibility and command!

Various victory conditions in different scenarios will challenge even the most skilled players allowing a multitude of strategies and attacks. Intuitive control allows players to set waypoints, pre-plot hyperspace travel routes, and move fluidly through the universe!

The Fog of War requires stealth and scouting to know the enemy's location and win the battle. Spies can raid enemy installations and gather valuable intelligence on fleet locations and technology. Spy drones can be attached to enemy ships to intercept valuable enemy communications!

Over 49 types of versatile starship enhancements, ensuring each player becomes a vital team-member!

TODO[edit]

Some items to track while this page is improved. Feel free to add things or integrate stuff from this list. --Culix (talk) 16:46, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unused sources[edit]

Some DarkSpace information is hard to find. Here are some sources that could possibly be used but haven't been yet.

Unreferenced statements[edit]

  • "Players who did not pay still have limited, 'demo' status within the game, usually without the ability to use more than basic ships or advance one's profile; the exact details of demo status have changed over time." (was in Development History)
  • "volunteer developers have numbered anywhere from four to nearly a dozen" (was in Development History)
  • "In the late 1990s Lyle and a few other developers were working on the framework for an internet space game called DeepSpace, which would later evolve into DarkSpace" (History - Inception). I used the HomeLAN interview as a reference that says the idea began in 1995. Does anyone have a reference that talks about DeepSpace or who else was involved in DarkSpace's inception? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Culix (talk • contribs) 18:27, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Scenario servers are similar to that of a massive capture-the-flag based first-person shooter" (from Gameplay section). If they have been compared like that in a reliable source, we should cite it. Otherwise it may count as original research?
  • If we want to have a section on design intents, the IGN Action Vault interview reads "The ships available in DarkSpace are very much like character classes in an RPG."
  • the IGN Action Vault interview also mentions that DarkSpace originally offered a map editor: "allowing players to create their own star systems and run the server out of their home or office." Do we know what became of this? Could discuss it in the technology or dev history section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Culix (talk • contribs) 20:43, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Minor thoughts/suggestions[edit]

Wow, this article has improved a lot since 2008, kudos to everyone involved (especially Culix)! My only thoughts/suggestions at this point are:

  • Consider removing external links from the article itself. Per WP:EL, they probably shouldn't be there. But at the same time, they don't come across as very spammy so if people feel strongly that they should stay, then there's probably a purpose for them.
  • The use of {{fact}} tags is great, but I would probably remove unreferenced material that could be controversial. Even mentioning a controversy (as in the "Present day" section) without sources seems like poor form for an encyclopedia, but that's just my opinion.
  • Some more internal linking would great, for example in the "Plot" and "Reception" sections.

But that's just my $0.02. I'll try to work on the article in a few days assuming nobody objects to these changes and Culix doesn't beat me to them!  :) Cheers! Wyatt Riot (talk) 22:07, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. I removed some external links and tried to wikify a few words. I'll have to sit back and think about internal linking so I don't link everything. As for controversial parts, yeah the whole "Present Day" section needs a lot of work. Ideally we could find a reference talking about some of the things that happened, but I haven't been able to track one down yet. I'll keep looking. --Culix (talk) 00:46, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quality Reassessment[edit]

I am requesting a Quality Reassessment for DarkSpace based on the project's Article Quality Scale. I believe the article currently qualifies for a B-class rating. My arguments:

1. "The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary."

Currently 39 references, of which 20 are secondary/not associated with the subject.

2. "The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies."

I have tried to cover most large aspects of DarkSpace's development and reception. It could really use an additional source such as a present-day interview with one of the staff, but I believe the current article qualifies for B-class status.

3. "The article has a defined structure."

Yes; article is now cleanly organized into sections based on the VGAG Organization guidelines, and has a lead section.

4. "The article is reasonably well-written."

I've done my best. Suggestions are welcome!

5. "The article contains supporting materials where appropriate."

Infobox is complete and two pictures have been supplied by a player. I think it could use another image but this should be enough for B-class status.

6. "The article presents its content in an appropriately accessible way."

I have tried to explain game terms and avoid jargon, keeping this accessible to the average reader. I have reworked the intro sentence to be in line with other well-written video game articles such as WoW, StarCraft, and Braid.


I will continue to work on this article but thought it would be good to update the rating before more work is done. --Culix (talk) 19:09, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks, Culix, for all the work you've put into this article. But anyways, yes, the article was pretty informative to a person like me who's never heard of the game, and your reasoning is logical. It gave me a good overview of the game... not a fantastic overview, but just good enough to receive a B rating. Again, props to Culix! In the meantime I'll rate the article a C, but if another person or two agrees it could deserve a B, then I will give it that! --Thetextfixer (talk) 23:22, March 3, 2010
Thanks for the reply! So what do you think this article needs before it will have a "fantastic overview"? Do you have questions that aren't answered? Topics we don't even mention? Does it need more detail in certain areas? --Culix (talk) 16:22, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Assessed it and it'll stay C due to a huge amount of missing references in the article. Ominae (talk) 03:01, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pay to play?[edit]

The home page of the DarkSpace website has this right near the top. "REGISTER today to create your account and play DarkSpace for FREE..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.232.94.33 (talk) 11:29, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on DarkSpace. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:20, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on DarkSpace. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:30, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:DarkSpace&oldid=1206880789"