Talk:E1M1: Hangar (Doom)

When I write something on a talk page (as opposed to Central Processing or a User talk: page), I get a reaction about one time in 50. Because these changes might conceivably be applied to hundreds of other articles, however, I thought I would make a few remarks.


 * The Final Doom walkthroughs (and some in Ultimate Doom also) have an "Overview" section which is never used. If general comments about the map's style or architecture are really necessary, there doesn't seem to be anything wrong with putting them at the top of the article (as in E2M8: Tower of Babel, for example), since that part is so short.  Similarly, if general comments about the map's difficulty or population would be helpful, IMHO they can go at the top of the "Strategy" section (as in MAP32: Go 2 It) without significantly distracting the reader.


 * The walkthroughs for E1M1 (before I changed it) and MAP01: Entryway provide an instructive contrast in style. E1M1 grinds through each detail of every room and passage (occasionally even telling you which direction to shoot in), pausing to note the differences between difficulty settings, and mixing in all three secrets even though they are also listed in their own section.  This seems like it would really distract a neophyte player who is just looking for the exit, for example (and on a large level such as MAP21: Administration Center, no one would plow through the entire thing).  MAP01's walkthrough, on the other hand, makes no mention of monsters, secrets, or even non-secret caches like the green armor, but simply gives the route to the final switch.  Then it talks about the goodies.  I have tried this latter, "layered" approach here (and so do many commercially published walkthroughs, for the same reasons).


 * Fredrik is of course welcome to complain about my new map. :>


 * The numbering of paragraphs in the "secrets" section is now inconsistent with "one secret sector = one numbered paragraph". This is intentional, because that equation cannot be used on every level without leading to quite ungainly exposition (e.g. the long staircase in E4M3 and the buggy sectors in E4M7).  To make a virtue of necessity, IMHO, we therefore want to offer the reader lists of things to improve his life expectancy, as opposed to merely lists of things that will improve his secrets tally.  Players who wish to complete max runs can simply count off the bold-faced items.


 * I really don't see why we need actual articles about Unreal or Half-Life.


 * No, I couldn't think of a better name than "points of interest". :>    (I thought we needed a place to put, e.g., the soul sphere on the tall post in MAP17: Tenements.)

Ryan W 23:50, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I like your changes. By the way, I think the statistics tables could be improved in many respects. I might work on that when I get some time over. Fredrik 13:00, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

The parser times out when I try to load the article. Perhaps putting all Compet-N data in a single template isn't a good idea. Fredrik 09:27, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. This seems like a bad idea. Fraggle 11:50, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Whoops, I didn't know that edit had even been applied! I'll try to fix it.
 * In the meantime, if someone has a better idea for how to avoid updating multiple tabulations of records in parallel, I'd love to hear it. :Z   Right now I'm just thinking about splitting Template:Competndata up by IWAD, which is more scalable anyway.    Ryan W 16:34, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Update: even that was too large to load (or edit), so things have been returned to their original state. I guess we'll just have to update two sets of tables in parallel whenever Adam Hegyi posts new records.    Ryan W 18:07, 11 May 2006 (UTC)