Skip to main content
replaced http://gamedev.stackexchange.com/ with https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/
Source Link

In the past, we1 decided that "How can I make an entire game like X?" was a bad question. There seems to be a new-ish variant of this, "What technology did entire game X use?"

This seems no more useful to me than the first kind. Fundamentally, it's the same question - how do I make an entire game? / how was an entire game made?

Usually a better question can be formed by extracting the parts someone is actually interested in. This uses the game as a shared reference explaining the goal, rather than the whole game being the question per se.

How do other people feel about either categorically closing (or drastically editing into the second form) such questions?

1 A very tiny subset of "we" that didn't actually include me.

In the past, we1 decided that "How can I make an entire game like X?" was a bad question. There seems to be a new-ish variant of this, "What technology did entire game X use?"

This seems no more useful to me than the first kind. Fundamentally, it's the same question - how do I make an entire game? / how was an entire game made?

Usually a better question can be formed by extracting the parts someone is actually interested in. This uses the game as a shared reference explaining the goal, rather than the whole game being the question per se.

How do other people feel about either categorically closing (or drastically editing into the second form) such questions?

1 A very tiny subset of "we" that didn't actually include me.

In the past, we1 decided that "How can I make an entire game like X?" was a bad question. There seems to be a new-ish variant of this, "What technology did entire game X use?"

This seems no more useful to me than the first kind. Fundamentally, it's the same question - how do I make an entire game? / how was an entire game made?

Usually a better question can be formed by extracting the parts someone is actually interested in. This uses the game as a shared reference explaining the goal, rather than the whole game being the question per se.

How do other people feel about either categorically closing (or drastically editing into the second form) such questions?

1 A very tiny subset of "we" that didn't actually include me.

replaced http://meta.gamedev.stackexchange.com/ with https://gamedev.meta.stackexchange.com/
Source Link

In the past, we1 decided that "How can I make an entire game like X?" was a bad question.In the past, we1 decided that "How can I make an entire game like X?" was a bad question. There seems to be a new-ish variant of this, "What technology did entire game X use?"

This seems no more useful to me than the first kind. Fundamentally, it's the same question - how do I make an entire game? / how was an entire game made?

Usually a better question can be formed by extracting the parts someone is actually interested in. This uses the game as a shared reference explaining the goal, rather than the whole game being the question per se.

How do other people feel about either categorically closing (or drastically editing into the second form) such questions?

1 A very tiny subset of "we" that didn't actually include me.

In the past, we1 decided that "How can I make an entire game like X?" was a bad question. There seems to be a new-ish variant of this, "What technology did entire game X use?"

This seems no more useful to me than the first kind. Fundamentally, it's the same question - how do I make an entire game? / how was an entire game made?

Usually a better question can be formed by extracting the parts someone is actually interested in. This uses the game as a shared reference explaining the goal, rather than the whole game being the question per se.

How do other people feel about either categorically closing (or drastically editing into the second form) such questions?

1 A very tiny subset of "we" that didn't actually include me.

In the past, we1 decided that "How can I make an entire game like X?" was a bad question. There seems to be a new-ish variant of this, "What technology did entire game X use?"

This seems no more useful to me than the first kind. Fundamentally, it's the same question - how do I make an entire game? / how was an entire game made?

Usually a better question can be formed by extracting the parts someone is actually interested in. This uses the game as a shared reference explaining the goal, rather than the whole game being the question per se.

How do other people feel about either categorically closing (or drastically editing into the second form) such questions?

1 A very tiny subset of "we" that didn't actually include me.

Tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackGameDev/status/119849578253131777
Source Link
user744
user744

Is "How was entire game X made?" off-topic?

In the past, we1 decided that "How can I make an entire game like X?" was a bad question. There seems to be a new-ish variant of this, "What technology did entire game X use?"

This seems no more useful to me than the first kind. Fundamentally, it's the same question - how do I make an entire game? / how was an entire game made?

Usually a better question can be formed by extracting the parts someone is actually interested in. This uses the game as a shared reference explaining the goal, rather than the whole game being the question per se.

How do other people feel about either categorically closing (or drastically editing into the second form) such questions?

1 A very tiny subset of "we" that didn't actually include me.