Talk:Starquake (video game)

Article move

moved by hand from Starquake. I've been away from Wikipedia for a while, and missed the "move" button at the top! Malcolm Farmer

Teleport Codes

Why do the teleport codes differ between ports? Bastie 17:46, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Commodore 64
POLAR	SIGMA	HYLIS	CHASM	PLASM
COSIN	FEMUR	XENON	MESON	Z.A.P
METRE	ASTRA	KAPPA	MALIS	OPTIC
ZX Spectrum
VEROX	SONIQ	QUAKE	EXIAL	DELTA
RAMIX	AMAHA	ASOIC	IRAGE	KYZIA
ULTRA	AMIGA	ALGOL	TULSA	OKTUP
Amstrad CPC
VOREX	ASCIO	ELIXA	OPTIK	SNODY
RALIQ	DULON	ANGLE	AMBOR	ZODIA
TALIS	QUORE	KRYZL	INDOL	UPAZZ
Atari XL
SALCO	NINIM	COSEC	CRASH	Z.A.P
TRAID	DELTA	ARTIC	ARGON	WHOLE
ATARI	KERNX	QUARK	PENTA	SECON
MSX
VORAX	KWAKE	ZODIA	KRANZ	DULAN
RAZON	ANGOR	SNOOL	ERCOT	ANTIO
TARAQ	UPLAN	ARGOL	INDLE	OPTIN
Amiga and ST
FLIED	SOLUN	TSOIN	HINDI	BORNO
CHING	TABET	KALED	SOCHI	CWORE
DAVRO	LUANG	ROKEA	NICHA	KWANG
PC
BAGEL	RUBIA	QUAND	PULSE	NUGAE
ABYSS	MORIA	MOIST	LOUSE	LIMMA
KYANG	RAPID	CLOUD	HIDEE	WATER

2fort5r (talk) 22:59, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Publishing year

The publishing year is 1985 but he Commodore 64 version is 1984, one year _earlier_ ?! Senbei64 (talk) 13:39, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

That's not possible. Starquake contains obvious references to Alien 8 which was released in 1985. I've altered the article. 2fort5r (talk) 23:01, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Broken link

I removed the map of Starquake link that gave a 404 error. No point having a dead link in the article. (No Username) 10:28, 8 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.89.188.87 (talk)

File:Starquake start.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Starquake start.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 4 May 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Starquake start.png) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:01, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Graphic artist

I reverted an unsourced contribution stating that unlike most Atari databases claim, David McLachlan, and not MC Lothlorien, is the artist responsible for the graphics. Every source I found actually points towards Stephen Crow as the designer (Original cover art, The Making of Starquake). He's also credited as the game author, together with Dave Collins. This contribution looks like misplaced edition or vandalism. The issue is that I'm not familiar with this game. In case the designer is someone else than Stephen Crow, please, add it to the article, followed by the respective source. — Radnyr ^(talk) 20:41, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Stephen Crow was the designer and programmer for the 8bit versions (i.e. the original versions), he had no input into the Atari ST version of Starquake.

The graphics were done by Mandarin Softwares in-house graphics artist David McLaclan, there can't be a dispute about this as his name is there on the title screen for the game in question for the version in question (Atari ST).

You are conflating "designer" and "graphics artist" as being the same thing, when that doesn't always equate. David McLachlan simply used the original 8 Bit graphics as the source and improved upon them for the 16 bit Atari ST, he didn't change the style of the graphics or redesign them, he simply updated them for more colours (16) for the Atari.

As i've converted the game to Commodore Amiga (released November 16th), I think i'm better placed for my "opinion" than someone who readily admits "I'm not familiar with this game." — Preceding unsigned comment added by GalahadFLT (talk • contribs) 21:56, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

I, on the other hand am very familiar with the game, but that doesn't matter, because what count are reliable sources Unfortunately, you cannot be considered a reliable source, just on your say so.

There can be dispute, because to use your own phrase - a name on the title screen does not equate to them also doing all the graphics. Bob Wakelin did title screens for Ocean, and Tissyman did titles for Software Projects - but they did not do in-game graphics, despite being credited on many screens. Chaheel Riens (talk) 22:08, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

I understand the difference between designer and artist, this being another reason why I made sure to point out the reasons behind the reversion both on the history and here. Please, tone down your replies, because they're coming across as hostile and condescending. Unfortunately, as pointed above, your word alone can't be considered a reliable source, particularly because you are directly involved in a port of the game, meaning you could have easily edited the information in a screen—and that's ignoring the possibility of a simple image edition of a screenshot. Additionally, this article isn't about the Atari ST version alone, so this information should be in == Atari ST version == section, the sources should use the appropriate cite template, and your contribution should be worded in a less misleading way—if David McLachlan updated the design, he updated the design, he didn't "do the art". A source about the MC Lothlorien confusion would help, too, because that information is coming out of nowhere in the article. If your claims are being contested, it's because we all want to improve this article. No one here wants to claim to know it all. I'll do some extra digging tomorrow and see if I can find other sources on the information you provided, and I'd appreciate if you added more sources here. — Radnyr ^(talk) 04:24, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

 This one is aimed at User:Radnyr, if i'd have spotted this comment from you earlier, I would have responded earlier.  Firstly, I find it a bit pathetic for you to claim that I "could have have easily edited the information in a screen", when the link I provided for you was from an ATARI ST site that has been up for years!  I don't need to edit or be deceptive over this information, its there, on EVERY single Atari ST site that holds information about Atari ST games, that title screen has David McLachlans name everywhere.  Now you can pretend that I have enough influence to change that name on the titlescreen on every Atari ST games site and others such as Mobygames, but the reality is thats the name on the screen.  I provided a source from an Atari ST site, and yet its STILL disputed.  This is the problem with Wikipedia, a few select people having too much power to influence the site, and then fabricate absolute horsefeathers as "could have easily edited the information in a screen".  So i've provided my source, and you're welcome to look for more, no matter where you look, it will ALWAYS have David McLachlans name.  So what now?

GalahadFLT (talk) 21:17, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

"Misc" entries

Just because something exists, does not make it notable. Can you find reliable third party soruced that comment upon the existence of your port? We can probably overlook the fact that you claim to be the author, it's unlikley to be much of a conflict of interest, but other sources would help.

As to the claim about the graphics, an image of a screenshot in no way validates your claim. All it does is show that the title screen was done by somebody called McLachlan - it's broad synthesis to assume that this in some way proves that all the graphics were also done by this person.

Finally - cease your edit warring, and tone down the vitriol. You're unlikely to sway anybdoy to your poitn of view if you carry on the way you currently are. Chaheel Riens (talk) 21:51, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

It doesn't matter whether its notable or not, who are YOU to determine what is notable? The credit for the graphics in the game have been incorrect for over 30 years, if Wikipedia is trying to be a valid source of information, it is NOTABLE for it to carry the correct information, or do you disagree with that sentiment?

As for an image not proving anything, I'd say it rather lends more weight to my claim than not! I also pointed out the reason WHY people would have thought it was MC Lothlorien that did the graphics because of the small size of signature and the likelihood that the majority of people that would have played this game originally on the Atari ST would have done so on a CRT TV, and not a much clearer picture monitor.

Its not "broad synthesis" that i've assumed anything. I've provided something that lends credibility to my claim, certainly would suggest a delay on being so ultra cautious to keep deleting it.

And don't warn me about vitriol or warring, what are you going to do? Send me to bed with no cookies and milk?

What I find odd, is that you're prepared to accept I might be the author of the Amiga version, even though it doesn't get released until tomorrow evening, but the credit for David McLaclan is deleted virtually straight away...... and yet theres more proof David is the artist than there currently is that i'm the author of the Amiga version.

Be consistent chap, that would be a start ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GalahadFLT (talk • contribs) 22:03, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Amiga version

Not referencing the existance of the Amiga version simply makes the page less useful and less accurate, and it's hard to understand how it's any less 'official' than any of the other version given that it had a physical release and was made with the blessing of the original programmer/designer. Eddy L O Jansson (talk) 20:17, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

See previous responses. The mere existence of a thing does not make a thing notable which is a requirement for inclusion. Nothing has changed in that respect. Chaheel Riens (talk) 20:33, 24 March 2019 (UTC)