Context: https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/160025/cant-remember-an-old-cyberpunk-winforms-game-update-found

Is it appropriate to ask for reopen votes? If it is, then please consider the following:

I asked this question originally with no screenshots, outside of the guidelines of Arqade (whipcrack!). I was subsequently able to find the information I needed and the question body and comments have plenty of information I'd like to piece together into an answer. I certainly apologize for the infraction (I am not used to Arqade), and now it seems that this question could be a nice contribution to Arqade as there appears to be no other questions about Decker. Once reopened, I'll gladly put the answer together and make it fit the normal Q&A format of Stack Exchange sites.

If it isn't appropriate to ask for reopen, then I apologize - I couldn't find a concrete answer one way or the other.


1 Answer 1


No, it's not in this case, because... well, quite frankly, there's no longer a question here.

We don't allow game identification questions of the "help me remember this old game" variety. The exception if you have a screenshot is primarily there for those situations when you, say, encounter an image of a game in some other media, but can't identify specifically what game it is. Essentially, it's for "what is this thing that I'm looking at?" questions.

Whereas, in your case, you originally asked for assistance identifying a game based on your memories of it and descriptions thereof. This is something that we consider off topic. There are a whole host of reasons for this, but the short version is, that it's just not a kind of question that conforms well to our software platform, and to the culture of our community. In your case, you were lucky enough to figure it out after the fact. That's great and all, but turning around and editing a screenshot of the game into your question after you've figured out the answer - and a screenshot that prominently identifies the game to boot - means that... well, you're no longer asking a question. At which point, it doesn't belong here either. There's just no there, there.

Congrats on figuring it out, but as I've been saying a lot lately, answerability is a poor metric for evaluating the cromulence of a question. Just because a question is answerable, doesn't mean it works here, just as just because a question is unanswerable doesn't mean it has no place.

  • +1, fair enough. Although I won't claim to completely understand this perspective, it is the consistent message. Thanks :)
    – jdphenix
    Commented Mar 14, 2014 at 23:43
  • @jdphenix If there's anything you specifically don't grok, I'd be happy to try to explain it further. (Though if it's simply why we consider ID's off topic, I'd advise you to take a look at the Identify This Game tag here on Meta for the long, ugly history of them. They were once allowed, and were, on the whole, terrible questions, across the board. We came to the conclusion that they are largely, fundamentally a poor fit, and chose to remove them.) Commented Mar 14, 2014 at 23:46
  • Okay, I'll bite. My question regarding reopening was ultimately driven by gaming.stackexchange.com/help/self-answer . Although I agree that I am no longer looking for identification (as evidenced by the recent wasted time because of said find), a proper answer still adds value to Arqade because there is absolutely no other content about this game. Although after the fact, I'm fully equipped to answer my own question.
    – jdphenix
    Commented Mar 14, 2014 at 23:52
  • 1
    @jdphenix Here's the problem: the question itself is off topic. Just because you can answer it for yourself doesn't make it any more on topic than if anyone else could answer it. The fact that, by being able to know the answer to the question, you could retroactively edit the question to shoe-horn it into an exception that exists, is essentially, using the letter of the law to defeat the spirit of it. You may want to look at the meta question I linked as related in the comments. In that case, a third party knew the answer, added it to the question, and tried to get it reopened... (c) Commented Mar 15, 2014 at 0:04
  • 2
    ...People... did not react well to that, because essentially, what the editor was doing was trying to use the answerablity of the question as an end run around the rule as written. It doesn't accomplish much other than making an otherwise pretty clear line enormously muddy. Commented Mar 15, 2014 at 0:07
  • 1
    Okay, I concede on this and I understand that ITG questions are off-topic. I honestly don't even care about the rep gained or anything of the sort, but simply want to contribute. Obviously that's a flawed goal if I'm trying to add something off-topic. I really am not trying to skirt the rules, promise. :)
    – jdphenix
    Commented Mar 15, 2014 at 0:12

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .