Editing Talk:Doom cheat codes (section) From DoomWiki.org Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history. Anti-spam check. Do not fill this in! I believe that the Doom 95 section should remain. For all but a tiny minority of gamers, AFAICT, Doom 95 *is* Doom and Doom II. Besides, it is not technically a source port, since id helped develop it; should we remove it from [[Source port cheat codes]]? [[User:Ryan W|Ryan W]] 19:50, 31 August 2006 (UTC) :AFAIK most Doomers who know of source ports tend to categorize Doom95 as one, so IMO it is justified to have the Doom95 cheats on the source port cheats article as well. [[User:Janizdreg|Janizdreg]] 21:14, 31 August 2006 (UTC) : ''For all but a tiny minority of gamers'' -- I've not followed the rest of this discussion but this sound-bite struck me as odd. Do you really believe that? Although I'm not a modern-day gamer, at the time when doom95 was prevalent, I didn't use it in preference to the original EXEs, and I'd be suprised if anyone did. Was it the only EXE in the post-doom3 re-release? -- [[User:Jdowland|Jon Dowland]] 09:23, 1 September 2006 (UTC) :: Well, I didn't mean to sound argumentative. My point was that it has legitimate reason to be in both places, based on the intent of each article; and if we're going to delete one, why not remove it from [[Source port cheat codes]], since other officially licensed versions (Mac Classic, PlayStation, etc.) are already absent? :: ''"Do you really believe that?"'' I, also, claim no special insight into the bleeding edge of PC gaming, but I have to ask what the alternatives are. DOSBox? Maintaining a non-XP system just for gaming? A source port which isn't even bundled with a GUI? Sounds like a lot of work and, in the second case, maybe a lot of pocket money as well. (And "when Doom95 was prevalent" was a very, very long time ago in this context.) [[User:Ryan W|Ryan W]] 22:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC) : Just wanted to chime in my views: Source ports like chocolate doom don't need a GUI. The original DOOM had no GUI and anyway you don't really control any settings other than key bindings. Besides, they have a text-based semi-GUI thing (at least Chocolate DOOM does.) Doom95 however is popular because only dedicated DOOMers know about source ports. DOSBox is slow and hard to setup, and furthermore the DOS EXE doesn't even come with DOOM: Collector's Edition. -Ryan [[User:74.220.70.232|74.220.70.232]] 14:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC) Summary: All contributions to DoomWiki.org are considered to be released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 International (see Doom Wiki:Copyrights for details). By contributing, you agree to be bound by the Terms of Use. Your changes will be visible immediately. Please enter a summary of your changes above. Do not submit copyrighted images or text without permission! This includes text taken from in-game codices or logbooks, or from official instruction manuals, strategy guides, and other such books. This project is not affiliated with id Software, Raven Software, ZeniMax Media, Bethesda SoftWorks, or any other commercial software developer or publisher. Use of trademarked logos and other protected intellectual property is solely for the purpose of analysis and critical commentary on the identified products and associated fan community activity, and does not imply any endorsement by any of these organizations or their employees, past or present. Upload images to the wiki. Don't forget to categorize pages! For testing, please use a sandbox. View this template Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)