PCGamingWiki talk:Game Article Layout

Why is GfWL considered DRM, while Steam or Origin are not? For example, Trine 2's DRM is Steamworks (for now). According to the Game Article Layout, this kind of info can't be included. Should this policy be changed?

There is some article conflict here; the Game Article Layout suggests that storefront-type services aren't considered DRM for the purposes of the wiki but the actual article on DRM lists them as DRM. The only distinction I can make is that Steam/Origin are considered 'acceptable' DRM - that is unobtrusive and conductive to the game.

Regarding them being acceptable, unobtrusive or conductive to the game, I disagree. It really depends on each person to say if it's acceptable or not, and that goes for GfWL too. Personally, I don't find Steamworks and Origin acceptable or unobtrusive when it forces you to install that 3rd party software, have an internet connection to install and play the game, makes you dependable of their online servers, etc...

Yes this is right, Steam and Origin are 'DRM' just as much as other services like TAGES.

The distinction is made because the storefront listed in the sidebar already tells what the DRM is. There's little purpose to listing it twice.

It would seem that way but not exactly. A game can be sold through Steam and not actually use Steamworks DRM - in which case you can run the executable direct from the steamapps folder and it won't use the steam overlay, etc. Additionally a game can be sold through Steam and use Steamworks for the Steam version only, with every other version being DRM-free or using different DRM.

And a game can be sold through other digital distribution services and have Steamworks or Origin DRM.

Agreed, this is helpful information. The PCGamingWiki:Game_Article_Layout is updated to reflect this.

Naming

I propose all operating systems and games should be referred to by their full names. This helps when people are looking for information through a search engine.

Bad: WinXP
Good: Windows XP

A search for "Borderlands Windows 7 wiki", PC Gaming Wiki should show up.

Formatting

I would recommend for clarity that all files should be encased with <code_> tags.

setup.exe and settings.ini

For paths, use the <pre_> tags:

C:\Directory\

Units

All units should be written down correctly for consistency and clarity.

Bad:1ghz
Good: 1 GHz

It is important to note that units follow defined international standards. All numbers require a space before the units. Units written out in full must be all in lower case, not in sentence case.

For a paragraph describing technical details about CPUs, the frequency would be written out as megaherz or gigaherz, not Megaherz and not GigaHerz.

I approve of this formalisation of our style. It would be good to update this page to make it clearer as well: http://pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/PCGamingWiki:Style_Policy

If you are interested in moderating by the way please let me know! You are doing a geeat job on the wiki.

Added.

• This layout emphasizes the technical side. I think.

• The minimum and recommended system reqs should be collapsible.

• I don't know how to deal with the links of the patch section. I'm reluctant to include external links in the body of the article, but I have to say that something along the lines of

Patch 1.x adds fix to global warming.

seems really practical.

• The real meat of an article should (or not) be the Issues & Fixes sections, where each problem is a subsection and is organically paired with a solution as it is discussed. The subsections are not set in stone, but I would like to propose two exceptions:
  • I think that the FOV problem should get a reserved subsection. A special treatment: Even though it is a very, very basic thing, it is the cause of much frustration among PC gamers.
  • This leaves every other graphical tweak in the Other Graphical Tweak subsection. Yeah. It's getting late. Anyway, Level 4 headers could do the trick, or bullet points. I think it should be the same across every article. This may seem a bit shallow at first glance, but I feel that if there is no definite set of subsections, formatting rules are the only thing we can rely on to achieve some sort of visual unity.

• The Unresolved Issues section. Should it be hidden if it is empty or should it proudly announce "Nothing to report!"? Or something slightly less lame.

I don't think the rest of the layout needs much commenting.

What do you guys think?

Peripheral settings?

Personally, I think it would be really helpful to include details for peripheral settings where applicable. Like specific stick settings for flight sims, wheel settings for racing games etc. There's no centralised place for it at the minute so every new game is a tedious - sometime fruitless - google search. However, is it beyond the remit of the wiki?

(also I'm a bit new to wiki editing so I hope this is in the right place)