The following information has not been confirmed by Volition and is therefore not canon for the FreeSpace universe.All information related to EAF Claymore Mk1 is non-canonBack to User-made Ships(http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/images/Inflogo.JPG)
I wouldn't go that far. It would be fine to say somewhere (in not such a ludicrously huge manner) what campaigns a ship appeared in or was originally designed for.
Personally I don't know why Inferno or the Babylon Project have some big ugly logo at the start. Each page should be about the individual ship imo, and not the mod itself. If the ship database is intended as tool to allow new modders to add content to their campaigns it should by extension be about the ships. Then each campaign which uses that ship could link from their page to the ship and vice versa if required.
Ontop of that, what campaigns do given ships get billed under? All or some? A lot of the ships in Inferno as I understand it weren't originally FOR inferno, several ships are from OTT, several are just models from Aldo. The Vesuvius for example is being used by Twisted Infinities, or Scroll of Atankjnksdas (whatever), not sure which, but both of them are older projects which may date back to or even pre-date INF:R1 so where does it go?
I agree with Akalabeth. I think having the image kinda 'blocks' the page. The two 'non-canon' lines should be sufficient enough to alert the view that the ship is non-canon.
FreeSpace wiki, not "other game/mod "wiki :yes:
I think he means is that all we need to tell viewers is that the ship is non-canon. That's all.
Someone got it wrong. The FreeSpace Wiki has a large non-canon/fanon section section and it's intended to provide the community with detailled info on anything concerning FS.
Removing the connection to the mod that uses it is not an option. There are many INF ships that will never be used in non-INF campaigns, just to give an example, and should keep the reference to INF like the others.
Maybe the small description that preceeds the Tech Descriptions should work. What about:
"This ship/fighter/bomber/etc. was initially created for OTT<link> to serve as <insert something>.
It has been widely used in <insert various mod and campaign names and their link>
It is a <small description of the custom ship>"
What about it?
Maybe the small description that preceeds the Tech Descriptions should work. What about:
"This ship/fighter/bomber/etc. was initially created for OTT<link> to serve as <insert something>.
It has been widely used in <insert various mod and campaign names and their link>
It is a <small description of the custom ship>"
What about it?
This is a compromise...
It's pretty much the same thing, yeah :)
The problem is: who's going to make the changes to the Wiki? I can't be alone...
http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/SD_Nyarlathotep#GeneralIts just standard wiki template...
Derelict combines the logo with the non-canon tag. What do I have to do to to get an Inferno version of that?
Its just standard wiki template...
I agree with AA... custom ship database is about CUSTOM SHIPS FOR MODDERS. If you don't put that ship for free use, then it's has no place in the list in the first place.
Keep hte camapaings out of it. Just put in "modeled by X for Z camapign" and provide a link. No more is needed.
This is outright, blatant stupidity.
The customs ships database is a direct outgrowth of the campaigns one. It always has been. I should know, I started the damn thing with the Kato, the Derelict retextures, and the TBP shiplist. If anything should be kept out of the database, it should be those ships which have never been used in a campaign!
Seriously. Someone pours hours worth of work into a model and into textures and it's already completely unappreciated because no one's ever used the thing, and you think that work they've done should be further disregarded and unappreciated by shovelling it under the rug and keeping it off the webpage??
And that makes sense how exactly? Not everyone who makes ships is a FREDder or even involved in another project. How is a person's ship going to get used if no one knows about it? People are always asking on the forums for ships when they can just look at the wiki and find whatever they want on there first. In updating the ship database I found a lot of ships that aren't in any MOD and I never had a clue even existed because no one's ever used them. If you keep those ships off the list then you only ensure that no one ever uses them. Which quite honestly is a huge, stupid waste.
While as a FREDder, I would support NGTM's idea, I would still recommend two separate categories. One named "User-made ships used in a campaign," the other "User-made ships not used in any campaigns"? We could have these as two subcategories of "User-made Ships."
That, I think, would be a compromise. Either way, all models would qualify, and still you will be able to find out which ships were used in which campaigns.
And what about those campaigns that were unappreciated because they didn't use multi-million-poly models with dozens of 16528x16528 textures on it? You can compare how much effort it takes to make a model and make a campaign, and decide for yourself if those are the modders that are unappreciated or the FREDders. This door swings both ways.
Quite simple.
This is, over all, a player's reference. We cover some other things at a basic level, and there's some indepth discussion surrounding FRED and its uses, but this is still a player's reference, not a modder's or campaign designer's or whatever. If you want to get your ship out there and used, that's your job. The wiki's job is to provide accurate and useful information to people who play the game.
And a ship that has never been used in a campaign is not something of interest to a player.
Quite honestly what's the point of that?
It is after all, the Freespace Wiki. Not the BWO wiki, not the Fate of the Galaxy Wiki or the Inferno Wiki or even the Casualties of War wiki.
All models, and all campaigns should be judged and respected equally on the Wiki.
If some one had bothered to check majority of the 'Derelict' pages regarding to ships are actually about certain 'special' ship and its appearances in the derelict campaign - not about the ship class. Like the previously stated SD Nyarlathotep.
As for ship classes they could go to sort of structure described earlier
User-made ships
User made ships appearing in campaigns
User made ships appearing in Inferno / Inferno R1 ships
... (same for BP)
...
User made ships appearing in total conversions
TBP Ships
...
You're the one that is complaining about individual mods that are not used in a campaign, saying that it is disrespectful for the modders. If you don't like the compromise, I'm fine with it. Sooner of later, we will have to split the "User-made Ships" category, because there will be so many mods in there in the future that it will be hard to find what you are looking for.
While as a FREDder, I would support NGTM's idea, I would still recommend two separate categories. One named "User-made ships used in a campaign," the other "User-made ships not used in any campaigns"? We could have these as two subcategories of "User-made Ships."
This is, over all, a player's reference.No, it's a community reference. And some people in the community are campaign designers. It's useful to know what sorts of ships are available -- provided they're in a usable format. Many times somebody has created a list of available ship mods, only for that list to quickly become useless once the author leaves the FS community.
And a ship that has never been used in a campaign is not something of interest to a player.The SH Gargant has never been used in a campaign...
And that makes sense how exactly? Not everyone who makes ships is a FREDder or even involved in another project. How is a person's ship going to get used if no one knows about it? People are always asking on the forums for ships when they can just look at the wiki and find whatever they want on there first. In updating the ship database I found a lot of ships that aren't in any MOD and I never had a clue even existed because no one's ever used them. If you keep those ships off the list then you only ensure that no one ever uses them. Which quite honestly is a huge, stupid waste.
Quite simple.
This is, over all, a player's reference. We cover some other things at a basic level, and there's some indepth discussion surrounding FRED and its uses, but this is still a player's reference, not a modder's or campaign designer's or whatever. If you want to get your ship out there and used, that's your job. The wiki's job is to provide accurate and useful information to people who play the game.
And a ship that has never been used in a campaign is not something of interest to a player.
Quite simple.
This is, over all, a player's reference. We cover some other things at a basic level, and there's some indepth discussion surrounding FRED and its uses, but this is still a player's reference, not a modder's or campaign designer's or whatever. If you want to get your ship out there and used, that's your job. The wiki's job is to provide accurate and useful information to people who play the game.
And a ship that has never been used in a campaign is not something of interest to a player.
Utter, total, complete, 11000% BULL****.
Why the hell do you want to make a difference between ships used in a campaign and those that weren't used in a campaign? It's not like that will influence someones decision to use ship X in his campaign. Or is it a ego thing..Your ships have been used by a campaign so they HAVE to be marked differently so people would know just how much better they are?
Get off your high horse.
Utter, total, complete, 11000% BULL****.
Why the hell do you want to make a difference between ships used in a campaign and those that weren't used in a campaign? It's not like that will influence someones decision to use ship X in his campaign. Or is it a ego thing..Your ships have been used by a campaign so they HAVE to be marked differently so people would know just how much better they are?
Get off your high horse.
The wiki is a depository of information, mostly used by modders. Especially since it's in the MOD database section. So the simple rule is KISS. Keep it simple. No dividing into unnecessary categories.
Just have a list of all ships and you cna mention where it was used in the ships description or the notes (Made by X for Y).
Ships used in custom campaigns have their importance. Other ships are relased hoping that *someone* will use them. A ship with an interesting background, a tech description(many ships released in little packages don't have one) and a solid connection to other ships and plots appreciated by the community is, IMO, much more important than "phantom" ships. They have a "curriculum" and the Wiki should focus on it...
I also find the ego comment hilarous. I've never released a working ship model and I don't pretend that I'm likely to ever do so. Point of fact, I've only ever released a couple of dumps, and one of those was a remake of someone else's stuff, while the other apparently had serious conversion errors and was never heard from again. (Stupid C4D, stupid texturing...) You have, and as I recall, a decent number of them remain unused. Is this about your ego?
They are not.
the Wiki should not focus on campaign in the ships section. It's there to give information on various ships. In which campaigns it features can be mentioned within the specific description. It doesn't need any extra markers or categories.
And what if a ship has a done description and background? What are the chances they will be compatible with MY campaign? Assuming I even want to keep the description, instead of writing my own.
The Mod database is gonna be browsed mostly by the modders and campaign makers. And even if I were not a campaign maker/modder, I'd hate any useless divisions. Information databases should be kept as simple as possible.
As for the modder approach to the database, people generally look for ships that FIT their story or their idea. Weather it has been used before or not is unlikely to affect their decisions, especially since being a campaign is no guarantee of quality or good design.
Searching for ships for you campaign is thus a visual job, where the one who searches will go trough as many craft as he can to find those he deems best. introducing different divisions and categories just out of some fit is bad, bad decision.
The Wiki is not a shop where people can find the ships they want to use in custom campaigns - the main purpose is to provide informations about the original FreeSpace universe and fan-created universes. A ship that has never appeared in a campaign or mod has little importance simply because...there's nothing to say about it other than its potential!
The FreeSpace Wiki is designed to be a comprehensive source of data for the FreeSpace series of games, including information about the games themselves, the FreeSpace universe, and community activities such as modding and the Source Code Project. (Emphasis mine, From the Front Page)
I reply with this:The FreeSpace Wiki is designed to be a comprehensive source of data for the FreeSpace series of games, including information about the games themselves, the FreeSpace universe, and community activities such as modding and the Source Code Project. (Emphasis mine, From the Front Page)
Which points out something that goes well beyond.
Because Trashman doesn't appear amenable to that.Actually, I think the only people with a problem with that are Mobius and possibly you.
Actually, I think the only people with a problem with that are Mobius and possibly you.
Actually, I think the only people with a problem with that are Mobius and possibly you.
Considering I already threw my support into a method of differentiating, and he argued against me, I must assume he's against it and I am not.
I reply with this:The FreeSpace Wiki is designed to be a comprehensive source of data for the FreeSpace series of games, including information about the games themselves, the FreeSpace universe, and community activities such as modding and the Source Code Project. (Emphasis mine, From the Front Page)
Which points out something that goes well beyond.
You're trying to say what exactly?
Simple: you evidenced only a part of that description and focused on the modding aspect. I marked other words as well, what does "...and community activities such as modding..." suggest you? Isn't that a clear reference to providing info about campaigns, plots, etc. etc.?
That's what I said. Saying "community activities" is generalizing. If the Wiki should provide info about community activities then creating a page about a ship used in a mod with no reference to the mod itself doesn't fit well with the Wiki's purposes.
Because Trashman doesn't appear amenable to that.No, I said mentioning that was fine in the ships description page. Some ships already have that info.