Talk:Idgames archive


The archive itself also has a tiny text box for people to review the games, limited to a few lines, with a five-star voting system; I used to have a lot of fun with this - it was quick and easy, and I wanted to make the phrase "imps on plinths" famous - but it seems to have broken over the last few weeks, leaving me with no creative outlet. Or has the whole of Pipex UK been blocked? -Ashley Pomeroy 18:56, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

The *archive* has no such thing. The interface on Doomworld has a facility for posting reviews, but it is completely separate from the archive itself. Fraggle 11:19, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

WAD quality as acceptance criterion[edit]

but includes several restrictions and requirements on what may be uploaded, either due to copyright reasons or to keep a certain standard in the quality of the files collected
I wasn't there, but the second part seems misleading.  Ty Halderman clearly stated that quality was not being judged ( 1 2 3 ), and README.INCOMING doesn't mention it specifically, saying only that "junk" is deleted.  Maybe Herring is here and can educate me.  :>    Ryan W (usually gone) 15:44, 21 November 2016 (CST)
This is just me. By "quality", I suppose it means that some work was put into said WADs and are worth at least a few minutes of playtime for players. Terrywads are shit, yes, but that's they're purpose. So technically, the "quality" of those WADs are "OK/excellent" by Terrywad standards. But WADs like an empty 128x128 room with the description being "MAH FIRST MAP IT ROKS XD" is terrible in any form of standards. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Voros (talkcontribs) .
That's the point.  The empty room would be accepted, if it loaded correctly and contained a start point and an exit and no bootleg resources.  The star rating system is supposed to keep people from downloading pointless things, but that's distinct from malicious things that aren't posted at all (in the same way that DWF mods remove warez and harrassment, but very little else).  Maybe I've misunderstood; should I upload a benchmarking suite of awful WADs someday?  :D    Ryan W (usually gone) 15:13, 22 November 2016 (CST)
I have been led to believe the new maintainers have stricter standards than Ty did, as some wads have been rejected for content issues other than not working or not being packaged correctly. This includes patently offensive or obscene material, and various Terry-style monstrosities meant to troll the community. Where exactly these standards fall, I don't know. --Quasar (talk) 17:07, 22 November 2016 (CST)
An update to README.INCOMING that was made today clarifies the current position of the /idgames Archive: "Files created for the purpose of trolling or spamming the archive will be REJECTed (or nuked without a REJECTS entry) on sight. No exceptions." That's the one "standard of quality" it has. Bad levels can and do get accepted--it's just that you can't upload such files for malicious purposes. —The Green Herring(talk) 19:16, 27 November 2016 (CST)


Hey, this is random, but where did you get the HTML template for this website? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

Yes, the talk page about the Idgames archive is a completely random place to ask that question... Presumably you're referring to the Monaco skin, which is described here. --Xymph (talk) 03:13, 28 May 2019 (CDT)