User talk:MrPrisen

From Team Fortress Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Hello, MrPrisen!

Welcome to the Team Fortress 2 Official Wiki!

Here are a few links to get you started:

  • If you're not too familiar with editing wikis, you might like to start with Help:Editing.
  • If you already are familiar with wikiediting, you might want to try Help:Style guide.
  • Recent Changes will let you see others' contributions as they happen.
    • To make Recent Changes more useful for all users, remember to provide an edit summary in the "Summary" field before you save your changes.
    • You can set the wiki to prompt you for a summary in your preferences.
  • When posting on an article's Talk page you should add four tilde symbols or ~~~~ onto the end.
    • This will add a signature and timestamp to your comment so others can easily tell who posted it.
    • Any new sections on an article's Talk page should be added to the bottom of the page and not to the top.
    • When editing normal article pages, don't sign your contributions.
    • You can use the Signature Icon.png button in the editing toolbar to quickly add a signature.
  • If you have any questions or need any help, please feel free to leave a message for a staff member.
  • If you have trouble with anything on the wiki or you're not sure about a specific topic, feel free to join the IRC.
  • You can also customize your user page if you like.
    • When uploading images for use on your user page, please add the prefix User MrPrisen to the file's name.
    • Additionally, if you would like to add any self-made content to the wiki, please do so by adding the prefix User:MrPrisen/ to the page title when you create the page.

Once again, welcome to the Team Fortress 2 Wiki!


-- WelcomeBOT (talk) 14:46, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Show preview

Pictogram info.png Please make use of the Show preview button. It gives you a preview of the edit you are making, allowing you to perfect your changes before you save the page. You can edit the whole article by clicking the edit button at the top of the page, which is preferable to editing multiple sections consecutively. { TidB | t | c } 12:54, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Warning yellow.png Please make use of the Show preview button. It gives you a preview of the edit you are making, allowing you to perfect your changes before you save the page. You can edit the whole article by clicking the edit button at the top of the page, which is preferable to editing multiple sections consecutively. You've done a lot of edits to Bots and Bots/ru which could've been condensed into a single large edit. { TidB | t | c } 11:28, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Warning red.png Please make use of the Show preview button. It gives you a preview of the edit you are making, allowing you to perfect your changes before you save the page. You can edit the whole article by clicking the edit button at the top of the page, which is preferable to editing multiple sections consecutively. GrampaSwood (talk) 15:37, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Badlands early development

Hi there,

that stuff is all covered here. You could expand that page and remove the section you've added.
GrampaSwood (talk) 13:29, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Moby Francke Conference

Hi,

The video is an interesting lecture. However, we generally don't cover such non-Valve videos as wiki pages. Certainly there are many other videos of the similar sort. This wiki uses them for citations, but don't provide pages for them.

Please see Merge comments on Talk:Moby_Francke_Conference.

I will use this video as citation in Moby_Francke. If you have more information about the presentation, like the actual location, presentation title, conference name, or audience identity, you could add it to the citation.

The video also provides notibilty citation for an NPP page for Jeff Ballinger.

M I K A D O 282 ⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ (talk | contribs) (Help Wanted!) 02:02, 21 July 2021 (UTC) 02:47, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I see that you might not read this daily; so, I wanted to update you that we completed the merge. It is not that we don't appreciate finding the source, but we would use such things as references, rather than as pages. It has been difficult finding sources for accurate attribution of content to the development artists. Any more sources you can find would be further appreciated. M I K A D O 282 ⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ (talk | contribs) (Help Wanted!) 18:30, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Phone pics?

I may have not made the best screen caps in my time, but how were these images you added to Dustbowl made? Video captures?

It these are to be kept, they really need to be improved, unless these are Valve-produced.

M I K A D O 282 ⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ (talk | contribs) (Help Wanted!) 00:49, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

I have the answer: it's how the pictures were taken by whomever took them. To my recollection we don't have any better pictures from that particular conference or whathaveyou so those are the best we have. So what do you propose should be done now, since there's probably no chance of getting any better quality pictures. The wiki should present those pictures regardless of quality imo. Thefixer2021 (talk) 04:47, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Fixed, except for the 2nd. I couldn't find a better quality image. MrPrisen (talk) 19:44, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
A few of these pictures are interesting (and have their own use elsewhere); but with all due respect and acknowledgement for your effort and intent, and there is value to the wiki in finding sources to back up attribution of content, several really aren't interesting. The larger issue is whether there should be any section on prerelease change history of any Team Fortress 2 content. This type of material is expressly not permitted as Trivia, and simply placing it under "Early Development" does not escape the requirements.
"During the development of TF2, Dustbowl changed a lot." This statement is not notable or particularly useful to a user. Is taken as read (may be very safely assumed/go without saying) that every map changes a lot during development, more so the launch games when the game concepts were totally new. What map doesn't change with closed and open play testing?
If you were writing a college thesis on the Development of Dustbowl, then some of the better pictures would be appropriate, but it has not been the objective of the wiki to provide any sort of development history of anything, unless Valve made a limited point about it.
The training version of Dustbowl is its own map and has it own page. Without impeccable citation, stating whether the training version of Dustbowl is an early version of CP Dustbowl, or a later version, or a fork is disallowed speculation.
If the pictures meet the image guidelines, they may be used, but really only for reasonable purpose and extent; a specific gallery of development stages would seem natural, but only for pictures that we have license to use, and accept that other editors may winnow an excessive gallery.
M I K A D O 282 ⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ (talk | contribs) (Help Wanted!) 04:18, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
I will correct all the errors indicated by yours, now I want to talk about the fate of the "Early Development" subarticles.
Where was you a year ago, when I made the first such subarticle in the 2fort page??? I thought that if I was not allowed to do such things, someone from admins would tell me right away, but everything seemed to be fine, and only a year later I was told that I doing something wrong.
Well, okay, what should I do with this information? Where should I move it? And in general, is it worth it?
I planned to make such subarticles on each map page, and well, there isn't much information there. For example, the all information about early development of Granary: there are a couple of concept arts for it, as well as in the June and September builds of TF2 on the first control point there is no a second pipe, as well as no second window. This information is too large for trivia, but too small for an other article, so it is best choice to create an subarticle about early development. And so it goes with almost every other map. It just so happened that Dustbowl had a bunch of different geometric changes that could be devoted to a whole page.
I just don't see such a compelling reason to devote an entire page or gallery of early changes to each map, like these subarticles are part of the information about the maps, these subarticles are its history of creation. As this article was here for a year, and everything seemed to suit everything, probably don't need to delete it.
MrPrisen (talk) 15:18, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
"Well, okay, what should I do with this information? Where should I move it?" The Team Fortress 2 article(s) @ TCRF.net. Hop in their Discord server as well if you have questions on which namespace something like this should be in (for example they may prefer this info be on the Prerelease: namespace version of the Team Fortress 2 article. You can even fully document source code leak stuff there. Thefixer2021 (talk) 16:10, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Well, maybe I'll do it later, but still, I want this information to remain here too, it's still history of Team Fortress 2.
MrPrisen (talk) 16:38, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
First, a note, because I have uncertain connections.
I am traveling and backpacking in mountain backcountry where my carrier may have (has) spotty coverage. Even so, I made a personal commit to other staff and through them to you that I would follow up on this should connectivity permit.
That said, I will post this at the soonest opportunity and then work on addressing your questions in-depth as fast as schedule, batteries, and connections permit.
M I K A D O 282 ⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ (talk | contribs) (Help Wanted!) 18:59, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── First, realize that I do appreciated you collecting of images from the development Team Fortress 2, especially the concept art. I do want to help include much of your research within the bounds of the wiki’s policies and style.

However, I don’t think it is particularly useful to spin differences in the early images into large sections of happenchance change tracking. Relying on incidentally published or leaked images is insufficient to develop an accurate and complete change history of each map, assuming that an accurate and complete change history is needed. Only access to Valve’s internal source repository could produce such a change history.

Let’s first discuss the 2Fort Early Development as it is much shorter and has some particular positive aspects that may be covered with some adjustment.

2Fort early development
  • It is rather easy on a casual scan of the page for the mind to mistakenly register the section as the pages normal Gallery. In truth I would say that the images would make an excellent addition to that page’s underdeveloped Gallery.
  • The fact that 2Fort is a "ported" version of TFC 2Fort is already covered by the lead sentence!
  • The fact that the "original" bridge had no roof is interesting from a game design/development standpoint, and would be appropriate for an article on the development of the launch maps, but a licensed image of the bridge without the roof in the Gallery highlighting that fact should be sufficient on this page. In a number of the concept images, it is obvious that the early concepts had no roof on the bridge; a simple caption any one of those images in a Gallery would suffice. Adding a citation to that caption to a developer discussing why the roof was added would be great, I think.
  • Differences between trailers and maps are already noted in Trailer Changes.

On Community servers long ago, I played on a version of 2Fort that had the "missing" stairwell, and I thought that I picked up on this wiki somewhere that it was a removed staircase. (Oh, yeah the Trailer Changes)

I really do like the collection of the concept art that you have assembled for 2Fort; it is a real contribution,* but the section should be fitted into the Gallery. I am tempted to make the move to the Gallery myself, but I wish to discuss it.

* … presuming that those are free all images. I think we do need more complete source attribution for the new images you uploaded.
Dustbowl early development

This is a large section. Not that some items don’t have certain value, this section does have several issues, including reliance on leaked sources, reliance on sources that have no evidence of relative stage of development or intents for development, speculating excessively on reasons for the changes or attempted rationalizing about those changes, and asking the question of whether this wiki should start attempting to reverse document the pre-release development content of Team Fortress 2

I have a list of specific comments prepared, but I don’t want to seem to pile on all at once.

As to your specific questions

" what should I do with this information? … Where should I move it?"

  • Quality images that conform to image policies AND Team Fortress Wiki:Licensing images could be well-placed in galleries on the associated map’s page. You have found interesting images, and if they are free-content (wrt this wiki’s status relating to Valve), I think a Gallery subsection for concept/development images is fine (don’t we have examples?).
  • "Each image on the wiki has a corresponding description page." IMO, the Summary section of File pages is a hugely underused resource. Whenever I want to publish additional information about an image, especially discussions and citations for what is in the image, I provide that in the image’s Summary. I then make sure to link the image description in the gallery to the Summary. IMO, for properly licensed developmental images, it would be fine to describe differences between the image and the patched map on the images disruption page. Also having the image and the list of differences together on a single page would make the list of differences more interesting.

" And in general, is it worth it?" I would have to say that very long, but far from complete lists of development changes are not useful to players. Pre-release changes are not nearly as important to users as post-release changes because the latter can impact game play. OTOH, quality images of concept and development are potentially entertaining, at least, especially if the differences in the development images are obvious and don’t need a "tour guide".

" there isn't much information there." I think there are reasons for that, not the least of which is that Valve doesn’t see fit (nor should they) to publish their repository change tracking and change reviews; but does want some development history published and we have covered or linked at least some of it; e.g., Developer commentary, Illustrative Rendering in Team Fortress 2, Professional paper: Illustrative Rendering in Team Fortress 2, ( accompanying slide show!!! )

"This information is too large for trivia," Prerelease information is unacceptable for Trivia expressly because it is about prerelease content which we presently do not cover, in Trivia or not.

"Where was you a year ago," As self-exposing chatty as I am, it might not really be the wiki’s business where I am, other than I have widely let it be known that there are times when it is irresponsible for me to participate in the wiki for months at a time; but I have also made it known that even in such periods, I may be accessed through Steam Chat. However, in this aspect, AFAIK there is no statute of limitations on application of style and policy, it is possible for corrections to be made months it not years after the fact. Yes, I do appreciate that early intervention that prevents wasting of personal time is preferred.

Sorry for the delay, I hope you appreciate that I did not attempt this full reply while I was generally off-line backpacking, in spite of best intentions.

M I K A D O 282 ⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ (talk | contribs) (Help Wanted!) 00:01, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Done.
PrisonShift3r (talk) 20:37, 18 August 2021 (UTC) (Yes, I changed my nickname)
Thank you. I only had time tonight to review 2Fort.
Really, seeing those first 4 under the Concept art prompts realization of how long they have been missing from the page.
I am also coming to the realization (as I look at unfamiliar images and wonder about their sources) that we have not been following our image guidelines for a long time that say we should provide source and creator in each image file.
I do it all the time. ⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ (talk | contribs) (Help Wanted!) 03:46, 19 August 2021 (UTC) 05:10, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

'Ello you

Question: Discord? Do you have one? Asking for a friend. Thefixer2021 (talk) 05:25, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I have one. I only use it for chat. I also have a UTC+03:00.
MrPrisen (talk) 16:46, 5 August 2021 (UTC)