Timeline for The [game-info] tag - What does it mean and should we keep it?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
24 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 19, 2010 at 3:08 | comment | added | GnomeSlice | @Grace > Actually, in the case of that above question, the tag is pretty needless. I've changed my mind, I think we should junk the tag for now. | |
| Oct 19, 2010 at 2:43 | comment | added | GnomeSlice | gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/9296/… | |
| Oct 15, 2010 at 1:32 | comment | added | GnomeSlice | gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/9021/… Even something like this I think may fit into that category. If anyone thinks I'm overthinking this, don't hesitate to tell me so. | |
| Oct 14, 2010 at 19:37 | comment | added | GnomeSlice | Both questions have answers which can be stated concisely, and without doubt, and are both (as I've said before) the kind of information you would expect to find in the game's manual. | |
| Oct 14, 2010 at 19:26 | comment | added | GnomeSlice | @Grace > I completely agree the name [game-info] is absolutely ambiguous. If a tag such as this is kept, I think a name change is in order. As for your examples: gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/8559/… gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/7350/… Yes the questions are both mine, but that's only because it made it a lot easier to find them on short notice, I'm sure there are similar ones out there. I wouldn't really say it's PROBLEM, however, once our site (hopefully!) gains many more users it may become so. | |
| Oct 14, 2010 at 19:12 | comment | added | Grace Note StaffMod | Can you link existing examples of questions? Naturally because they have been retagged, I can't find them directly. And because of already documented issues, the activity history of the retagger only shows the latest retag. So can you grab a few examples? I'd like to see how much of a problem it really is. | |
| Oct 14, 2010 at 18:58 | comment | added | Grace Note StaffMod | Okay, attempt number 2 at a more coherent comment. To start, whether or not this kind of question needs its own tag, I still side with Arda Xi in that it is extremely ambiguous to what "game-info" refers to, since the vast majority of our content is exactly that. Perhaps a [statistics] tag can be used - this won't dictate what the answers come in, but instead dictates that the answer is going to be about actual statistics of elements in the game. But before we introduce that tag... | |
| Oct 14, 2010 at 18:39 | comment | added | GnomeSlice | What can I say, I'm stubborn, but if I'm the only one who sees the same merits of the tag that I do, then I'm likely mistaken. :) | |
| Oct 14, 2010 at 18:37 | comment | added | GnomeSlice | @Grace > In regards to your first point, maybe it's just me but I see a convenience factor. The kind of thing you'd want to find by using the [game-info] tag, or successors of it, is the sort of basic information that you'd want to find in the game manual. You probably don't really want a super long explanation for something like that, and the tag would make that particular answer very easy to access for anyone else who requires that same basic information, without having to search copiously. Again though, it seems like this is just me, judging from the other responses. | |
| Oct 14, 2010 at 12:20 | comment | added | Grace Note StaffMod | Let's consider two points - one, why is finding charts/tables more distinct than how to use/how to find/how to make such that it gets its own tag? Two, what about a question that gets two answers, one of which is a chart and the other of which is textual data? The beauty of the Stack Exchange engine is that we don't need constraints that all tables must be grouped in an index of tables. | |
| Oct 13, 2010 at 22:21 | comment | added | GnomeSlice | @Brant > Not exactly, [game-mechanics] is more along the lines of how a game itself works as a whole. | |
| Oct 13, 2010 at 19:02 | comment | added | Brant |
It seems to me like you're describing the [game-mechanics] tag.
|
|
| Oct 13, 2010 at 18:19 | comment | added | GnomeSlice | @tzenes > Hmm. I suppose that is true. | |
| Oct 13, 2010 at 16:20 | comment | added | tzenes | @GnomeSlice if the question/answer thread covers more information than simply [game-info] then it would become awkward to tag each individual topic would it not? | |
| Oct 13, 2010 at 16:19 | comment | added | GnomeSlice | @tzenes If the question/answer thread covers more information than simply [damage] then it would become awkward to tag each individual topic would it not? | |
| Oct 13, 2010 at 15:24 | comment | added | tzenes |
@Gnome I wasn't actually suggesting tagging words like Damage, but instead pointing out that using a search engine produces the same effect. But let's get to your point may have no way of knowing which information will be given to him/her. If you only care about damage and nothing else, how is using the tag damage different than game-info? In both cases you're solving the same use case A user may not want to read the entire question to find that out.
|
|
| Oct 13, 2010 at 12:01 | comment | added | GnomeSlice | Well tagging each individual element (damage, range, effect, etc.) would become ineffective, for the simple reason that an asker asking about a certain item in the game, may have no way of knowing which information will be given to him/her. [s]he may not even take a certain element into account at all, in which case, those tags would be missing. Compound that with the fact that there is a maximum of 5 tags per question, and it becomes cumbersome. | |
| Oct 13, 2010 at 5:14 | comment | added | tzenes |
So first off, we don't tag questions based on answers, so that kind of goes out the window. Secondly, if we're trying to save the user time trying to find terms like Damage Range Effect, then why aren't we tagging those, maybe they only care about one and not the others? In fact, let's take this to its logical conclusion: Let's tag every key word in the question. Of course with that many tags we'd need some system to search through them; and now we've reinvented the search engine. If what you care about is damage knife [modern-warfare-2] why aren't you just searching for that?
|
|
| Oct 13, 2010 at 2:43 | history | edited | GnomeSlice | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 173 characters in body
|
| Oct 13, 2010 at 2:38 | comment | added | GnomeSlice | 2 reasons. a) A user may not want to read the entire question to find that out. b) A user searching for answers in pre-asked questions may like to immediately know what kind of information is presented in an answer. | |
| Oct 13, 2010 at 2:36 | history | edited | GnomeSlice | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
I continued adding information as inspiration struck (mostly in the form of tzenes)
|
| Oct 13, 2010 at 2:27 | comment | added | tzenes | Would you mind explaining that merit to us? Why isn't just putting "I only want factual, embedded data" as part of your question insufficient. | |
| Oct 13, 2010 at 2:24 | comment | added | GnomeSlice | While I agree the name [game-info] is a bit ambiguous, I still think a tag such as this could have some merit. | |
| Oct 13, 2010 at 2:05 | history | answered | GnomeSlice | CC BY-SA 2.5 |