Talk:Tower defense

message: the screenshot sucks
Interesting redirect, is Desktop Tower Defence the first game of the genre? If not, I think this needs to be a short article about the genre as a whole. LukeSurl t c 13:14, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It was redirected because this was a deleted article that was continually being created with no unreliable sources. The direct itself should be deleted if people don't want it point there, but it was as good as place as any.--Crossmr (talk) 14:12, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, this talk page gets wiped when the article gets deleted, but the gist of it was that no one could find any sources that met Wikipedia's standards. --Pdeq (talk) 08:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I've added a note above about the old afd. It survives the deletion.--Crossmr (talk) 17:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Please don't delete!  I promise I'll help look after it.  TD is an important Genre, not something to be deleted. I am the RockReader...  I will answer all of your problems. 15:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  DTD first in genre 

message: This statement in the header strikes me as worrisome:
There are many tower defense games like Onslaught, Flash Element and Vector TD but probably most famous is Tower Defence By Roman Saine.
If the game isn't notable to be in wikipedia, then it's probably spam to start listing it in this article. I'm going to wait to see other people put in their thoughts. But if I don't hear anything, this stuff is getting cut. Randomran (talk) 18:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it, it's obvious spamming. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why do I get so excited about removing bad edits? Watch how fast I go. Randomran (talk) 05:44, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Probably the best way to avoid spam would be to avoid posting any external links at all. But if there are any notable tower defense games out there, I'd encourage people to try to make some new wikipedia articles for individual games. That would help people get their research fix if they wanted to learn more about specific tower defence games. Right now, the only recticle that appears to meet that standard is Desktop Tower Defense. Although even that article seems to be in some trouble. Randomran (talk) 20:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  How about Immortal Defense? It got independent strategy game of the year, and has been reviewed in many print game magazines and online game review sites. I'm not sure it's that notable because it's just an independent game (like Darwinia), but as independent games go it's fairly notable. 67.84.25.46 (talk) 01:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hey, welcome to wikipedia. Wikipedia actually has pretty clear standards on this if you check out the general notability guideline. Independent games can be notable. The key is if it's covered by reliable sources that are independent of the subject. That means more than just the developer's website, or press releases that get spread around the net. If you have two reviews in a reputable source like gamespy, IGN, or some print magazine, that would be enough. You'd want to find those sources, though, so you can do a proper citation. Randomran (talk) 16:27, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  SPAM concerns 

message: A few hundred people were in Age of Empires II Tower Defense games at any moment on zone.com back in the days before WC3. I don't want to amke a big argument, just cite whatever you add on the subject or its going to get removed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.37.63.178 (talk) 03:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We have a citation for WC3 but we don't have one for Age of Empires II.  Your confused point seems to be that we should remove your unsourced addition but I'm inclined to let it stand for now to see how this might be improved. Colonel Warden (talk) 08:34, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

text: That is ridiculous. DOTA is not even the first map of its genre; there were dozens of other big-name maps (Such as Aeons of Strife) which DOTA emulated. And as for the Tower Defense genre, it has been around long before WC3 or AoE2 even came out - its fist big appearance was in Starcraft. Check your facts before you jump on the opportunity to permanently embed them into history.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.13.22.201 (talk) 19:07, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Between these three, its Starcraft --> AoE --> WC3. Starcraft was out before AoE, and TD was already a common game style on its servers. 195.109.63.17 (talk) 12:31, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dont say "First made popular by WC3" 

message: Of course TDs derivated from big realtime strategy titles like Starcraft and WC3, but although they definitely involve much stratetic gameplay and often also teamwork, but I always classyfied them as puzzle games, especially in their flash and mobile form... 78.50.6.57 (talk) 13:52, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You make a very classic mistake here. TD is a strategy game, not a Real Time Strategy game, which is the classic and typical name given to the reources gathering, base buildings games like SC, C&C and the lot.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.109.63.17 (talk) 12:33, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  strategy game? 

message: I know a lot of people want to spam their favorite tower defense game. That's not allowed. What is allowed, however, is adding a tower defense game that has become the topic of reliable journalists. For example, this gamasutra article mentions a game called "Protector" ... if someone wanted to add this with a proper reference, I would support it. I might do it myself when I find some time. Randomran (talk) 21:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question. I have no idea. Notability on wikipedia isn't determined by a popularity contest, but based on anything that gets covered by reliable sources that are independent of the subject. See WP:GNG. If the only coverage of the game is from the game's website, instruction manuals, and some blogs and forums, then it's not notable. If it's covered by even 2 game news sites, then it IS notable. Randomran (talk) 17:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Those other game genre articles link to games that are notable: games that have been covered by big gaming news sites and reviewers. There aren't many tower defense games that have reached that level of notoriety. Wikipedia isn't the place to promote your favorites. It's a place to write about topics of real world significance. Randomran (talk) 19:04, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

text: As I said, I don't promote favorites, I'm trying to start a list like many others. You could make a list of any TD games, but please let's add more examples on this page, up to more complex graphics like Defense Grid: The Awakening (I din't start that page). You can find so many obscure games around, tell me if all games listed on List of strategy video games have reviews on big sites or their own wiki page, so notoriety is not a valid issue. Examples of reviews of Harvest: Massive Encounter (I didn't start this either): IGN.com, gametunnel.com. Examples of reviews of "Azgard Defence": justanothermobilemonday.com, smartphonemag.com, myworldofhandhelds.com. --Ternami 20:46, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  If the examples in the other lists are just an independently produced fan game with no notoriety, they shouldn't be there. I think adding a mention of Defense Grid would be entirely appropriate. But something like Azgard Defence isn't, because the reviews come from other self-published fansites. Randomran (talk) 21:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tower Defense games that qualify as notable 

message: First, let me introduce myself - I am the first person who has ported a TD on a computer, through the Starcraft editor. I am not notable, and do not want my name included (it would look like pure vanity/egocentrism anyway), what matters is that I can accurately tell you the early history of Tower Defenses (that is, if you believe me, as I have no reliable sources or proofs).
It all started in 1992, with a Gameboy game called Rampart, to which I was quite addicted. Years passed, and, with the help of two other friends, we did the first PC port of it by adapting it as Turret Defense on Starcraft in precisely november 1999. To be honest, this was really a crappy map, and I left it as is.
One of the two other people who made it with me thought this had a future, and continued working on the map, alone. Around 2000/2001, Battle.net became flooded with tower defenses (it was notable WAY before Warcraft III and AoE II btw, you need to fix that).
I am sorry that I cannot have any reliable sources (though I still have the unprotected version of the original starcraft scenario which was the very first tower defense), but at least I hope my comment will help you look back at Rampart as the origin of it all and have a better idea of when to date the beginning of the TD web-epidemy.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.64.118.63 (talk) 08:57, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Your account makes good sense to me - thanks for the input.  We have good evidence for Rampart and, as this is a recognisable ancestor of the genre, I have updated the article accordingly.  It may be that Rampart has progenitors - I recognise some affinity with Space Invaders.  As we accumulate evidence, we shall improve the article accordingly - this is the Wiki way. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:21, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Glad that my input, even unsourced, could be of some slight use :) --81.64.118.63 (talk) 14:22, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Interesting stuff. Makes sense. It's kind of a shame that no reliable sources can confirm it. But I figure it's good to put this info in there until we have anything that seriously contradicts it. (Or, hopefully, confirms it.) Randomran (talk) 16:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  We have reliable sources for the existence of Rampart, its dates and its other details.  We could use some verification of the linkage between that and later games/mods but that's not a big claim.  Colonel Warden (talk) 17:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Really? I checked the references here really quick and couldn't find a mention of Rampart. Randomran (talk) 19:41, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I was referring to the separate article on Rampart.  But I've added a ref here to nail it. Colonel Warden (talk) 20:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ahh, I see. Thanks. Randomran (talk) 20:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

text:  We really, really need a better source for the claim that the genre descends from Rampart than an anonymous Wikipedia comment. As-is it looks like total speculation in the article itself. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I wish I could have provided some sources to back me up, but sadly there are none other than my own anonymous word, which I realize has no credibility/reliability whatsoever, sorry (but then, anyone can write whatever they want on their website, there are topics such as this that can not be completely reliable regardless of whether it's sourced or not) --81.64.118.63 (talk) 09:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Random websites wouldn't be reliable research anyway. Randomran (talk) 10:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: They're not reliable. Nor is the current sourcing for this. The source in no way indicates that Rampart was remotely involved in tower defense other than the fact that it bears a bit of a resemblance to the modern genre. Unless someone can point to a reliable source which draws the conclusion its not up to us as editors to do that.The article is wandering in to areas that got it deleted previously.--221.143.25.19 (talk) 12:15, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

text: I've been playing Starcraft since 1998.  I have on my computer a map (not made by me) called Bible Defense Revelation.scx, with last modified date Monday, May 28, 2001, 6:44:58 AM .  It isn't very good, but it has the same gameplay as all other defense maps, including many other tower defense games that have infested bnet for at least the last 7 years. 71.200.102.171 (talk) 03:58, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think its going to be nigh impossible to find a "reliable source" which checkes Wikistandards because by the time of its inception and creation, the evolution to the modern TD games was absent. Rampart, may very well be the origin from which TD has evolved, but I'm fearfull it can't be backed by any real sources which are credible and independend enough. I've also been playing Starcraft and Brood War (which is what the .scx format belongs) and the TD maps on its servers were as far as I now to be the real harbingers of the Tower Defense style of play we now know. I especially remember very closely the star-made map which allowed 8 players to participate at once. 195.109.63.17 (talk) 12:45, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins of the Tower Defense 

message: Defense of the Ancients is not a tower defense mod.  The player cannot build towers, and instead controls a single hero unit.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.105.49.196 (talk) 04:43, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: According to a Gamasutra article, "Defense of the Ancients is a fascinating, still-played Warcraft III mod which helped inspire Tower Defense". Gamasutra is a very reliable source. Even if it isn't a Tower Defense game, it was still an influence. Randomran (talk) 08:13, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Gamasutra failed here. Defense of the Ancients could not and did not influence the Tower Defense genre in any way. Tower defenses existed years before DotA, and their game mechanics are vastly different.  Jineo (talk) 06:56, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not sure you're proving Gamasutra wrong. Just because Tower Defenses existed before DotA, it doesn't mean DotA had no influence on Tower Defense or their popularity. If you want to disregard a pretty reliable source, you're going to need to find some reliable research for us to work from. Randomran (talk) 06:59, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I honestly have no idea where gamasutra gets the idea that DotA had anything to do with TD, and the article actually states that it was inspirational to flash TD in some way unspecified. If Gamasutra actually wanted to talk about TD in detail, I might see the inclusion of that as a source, or possibly, if it was more than a footnote that it (disputed by us) influenced flash TD. Yes, we're both arguing for the truth, and I don't want you to make an exception, but we're still just saying that Gamasutra did fail here. I think in this case, either a better citation should be dug up than from Gamasutra, or the statement removed. --Izno (talk) 19:04, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's possible there was a failure by Gamasutra here. It wouldn't be the first time that a reliable source played fast and loose with the facts. But then we usually go on what other reliable sources have said, and try to resolve the conflict. What's your read on the source below, which says that people would recognize the gameplay in PixelJunk Monsters from Defense of the Ancients? I mean, when I look over it, DotA has enough in common with tower defense that an influence is not unfathomable: automated waves of creeps try to make their way to your base, and you need to stop them. Randomran (talk) 19:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  My read, when I had a look at it, is exactly what they said: it's easy to recognize the play similarities. But that doesn't mean one or the other was based on the other (similarly, that doesn't mean either was developed in a vacuum). However, we're also missing a bit of history here, I think. It's quite well established that DotA is based on the "Aeon of Strife" (AoS) maps of  the earlier-released StarCraft (though I don't know if  they were called that in StarCraft). I do think it possible that there's an association there, as the second source notes. However, Gamasutra certainly takes it too far in this case. It's an offhand comment which was obviously not researched whether in affirmative or negative of the comment. You have a thought about where you want to take its? --Izno (talk) 20:04, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

text: To be honest, I'd have to go with removing it in this case - while Gamasutra IS a realiable source, it doesn't mean they're right on every single statement. Furthermore, the information you're quoting is just a sidenote, not the focus of the article, making it less reliable (ie. I could write a paper about ant colony optimization and mention something about real ants, but since that isn't the focus of the article, probably noone would review it and I could publish it in an influential journal - and yet it could easily be wrong). The same logic can be applied to the CNet review (and in general, what do reviewers know? ;)). If an article about TD mentions DotA, then by all means, include this information, but otherwise, I think it should be left out. --VPeric (talk) 19:45, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

text: Leave it to be or merge it into Real time strategy are options that I can see, as this largely is a derivative of the real time genre (if there's another option, feel free to add it). The concern I have with the latter is that RTS might get large; perhaps a "spinoff" section might work either way. The other of course, is just to leave it and come back to it later, and I think I might advocate this, as TDs will undoubtedly make a resurgence into culture when StarCraft II comes out, so it may happen that at that time it will find its way into other media. --Izno (talk) 21:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's a good plan. I'll see if new coverage starts to crop up once StarCraft II comes out. Otherwise, a merge would help provide more context I think. Randomran (talk) 03:09, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  DotA isn't a TD 

message: Does anyone know the subgenre for the games where 2D people run at your castle, and you have to defend it? (e.g. Defend Your Castle) Would that be tower defense, or something different?--ZXCVBNM 21:13, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would think not. In my opinion, one of the defining characteristics of the genre is the lack of direct player input - you just place the towers, everything else is automatic. Defend Your Castle, on the other hand, is built around the player doing stuff. --VPeric (talk) 21:29, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  See the Juggling strategy below. Stationary defenses have a limit and to go further in the game you need to be more active and start opening and closing paths to delay the units and have more time to kill them.80.34.137.194 (talk) 10:46, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  2D tower defense? 

message: This article has WAY too many citations, it makes it look messy. You don't need to cite a media source that says that all these games exist, as long as the games are wikilinked to their own sourced articles. Most of these citations (which, I assume, are there to prove they're tower defense games) should be in the articles about the individual games as sources for their genre there, rather than in an article about the genre itself.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.20.184.42 (talk) 05:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Incorrect. Everything should be cited if possible. It is liable to be removed otherwise. --Izno (talk) 05:49, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Yep. Our WP:V policy says that we cite everything. Sorry. Randomran (talk) 06:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  way too many citations... 

message: Ok, I have taken the liberty of adding the strategy section, based on the idea that it will be very useful to leave a short description of the most important strategy: Juggling. Please leave it, it may not have any reference, but it is exactly what I would have wanted to read.
On another note, Rampart may have been the main inspiration, but going back to the old BBC computers, contemporary of the spectrum, amstrad and comodore, there was an addictive game where you had to harvest wood, water and stone to fortify a hill and defend it from attacks at the end. It had the basis of resource management, but the idea was not waging war, but defending a hill. 
In my opinon, the first proper, modern TDs came about with MODs, as our fellow map maker states above, and the latest flash versions are extremely limited compared with the hundreds of different maps for Age of Empires, were you have teamwork and resource management.
On a final note to enciclopedist, there are references out there for the juggling strategy, I read it in a youtube comment, though I was very close to developing it myself, I love TDs. 80.34.137.194 (talk) 10:41, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strategy, JUGGLING and earlier version than Rampart 

message: I suggest including an "External links"-Section to this english version of the articles.
The German and even French version include this section with links such as:
* Tower Defense Flash Games
* Tower Defense-Collection
--85.182.241.133 (talk) 10:04, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That'd just be commercial spam, there's no encyclopedic merit in these sites. Fences&Windows 20:46, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Cop:_LAPD#Free-combat_mode "Precinct Assault is a free-combat mode in which each player starts with a single base and can capture automated Turrets or Outposts across the level. The objective is to defeat opponents by purchasing and deploying Hovertanks to invade their bases." - 98.207.189.113 (talk) 10:54, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  does Precinct Assault from Future Cop: LAPD deserve a mention? 

message: Does stretching the genre from RTS to FPS count as notable? The title "Iron Grip: Warlords" from 2008 is to my knowledge the first title that to some extent use the tower defense concept in a FPS environment. The game Sanctum that is just released builds purely on the mainstream TD concept but in a FPS environment where your mainstay of defense are strategically placed static towers against waves of enemies but you are also a mobile fighter aiding the static towers. IG warlors has not gained tremendous amounts of fame (still it has its own wikipage) and of course the notability of Sanctum will depend on the reception of this game but I think this is a notable information that the TD concept is so popular it spreads and blends into other mainstream game concepts. 
This would of course also put the opening statement that "TD is a subgenre of real-time strategy computer games" in question. Is it necesarily so by definition? Or is TD rather defined as the game concept of waves of AI controlled enemies which must be elimenated before they reach a predefined location by placing static towers attacking the enemies (regardless of player viewing point i.e. RTS, FPS, TPS). For sure the gameplay idea was made notable through RTS mods but does that define what a TD is?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.16.189.98 (talk) 16:04, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  How about FPS - TD - what is the definition of a TD? 

message: I think there are turn-based games that feature a lot of similar gameplay mechanics. Master of Monsters, The Battle for Wesnoth come to mind. SharkD  Talk  15:43, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turn-based examples 

message: Tower Defense by Roman Sanine predates Flash Element Tower Defense.
I can't say for sure if there were some before that, but I know it was the first one I played, and it was quite popular at the time. Here's a youtube video of it, that is from 2006 (before Flash Element Tower Defense): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPk2OmMQVfk
Just google "Roman Sanine" to play the game, or find more videos of it.
Oggologgo (talk) 18:13, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flash Element Tower Defense is not the first Flash version 

message: It's a nice claim, but completely uncited:
By 2000, Turret Defense, a map for StarCraft created by Ghost[Yoon], had become massively successful. Ghost[Yoon]'s 'Turret Defense' was the first, and it set the standard for all Tower and Turret defense games to follow.
--Izno (talk) 19:00, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The maker of the first StarCraft map 

message: Nether Earth and Herzog had you fight on a single-lane map. By making bots stay at captured stations in Nether Earth, you could basically make them into "towers". The ONLY way Rampart could be a TD is if there was a "river" map seeing player(s) trying to destroy enemy ships.
AoS (DOTA/MOBA) has very few relations to TD. Unless, of course, it is Savage where you try to kill enemies with towers if you are the "master".
Herzog (MSX) could see the player using still-standing tanks to defend the base, so it may also have been the inspiration besides NE. - Yura87 (talk) 20:35, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  More plausible origin 

message: Some tower defense games or custom maps also require the player to send out enemies to their opponents' game boards respectively their controlled areas at a common game board. Such games are also known as tower wars games."
Looking for source, or at least user confirmation, that tower wars is a sub-genre name and not mereley a single game (Tower Wars). I've never encountered this as a genre and Google search produces exclusively Tower Wars related stuff. Skrofler (talk) 17:12, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Tower wars as a (sub)genre was common in Warcraft III. I can't tell you if it existed in other games. No citation as with the majority of such particular pages, but I can affirm it as a user. I even played a few, though I didn't favor it so much as team TDs or even co-op TDs. --Izno (talk) 17:28, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tower wars is a genre? 

message: Here is review of this game from 2006: http://jayisgames.com/archives/2006/05/master_of_defense.php
I've played it a lot back in the days and it was awesome! It was released in 2005 or 2006.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.112.111.29 (talk) 13:04, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The addition of that information to the article is likely promotion. I cannot verify that review, nor am I sure I want to, because it may be unreliable. Please stop trying to add this to the article. --Izno (talk) 13:50, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

text: Verifiability, not truth. If you don't have a reliable secondary source to back your statements up, then they are meaningless. On top of that, the website you provide as evidence that the game was "a thing" is only of questionable reliability (see WP:VG/RS#Checklist). On top of that, the current article is neither written in a fashion to "promote" a game, nor is it written such that one game claims to be first. On top of that, the addition of the text in the fashion you're doing is completely promotional, and the game isn't even notable. It is highly unlikely that the game is worth mention in an article on a genre if it cannot even claim notability. Please, stop. It's not the first time this has come up and each time the addition is reverted. --Izno (talk) 23:42, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Master of Defense does not mentioned as first Tower Defense game? 

message: The article mention "a tower-defense minigame in Final Fantasy VI (1994)", referenced by http://www.ign.com/lists/top-100-rpgs/2/2 . Indeed, the source says "Its mini tower-defense games break up the monotony of random battles, while each character’s unique combat abilities means everyone serves a purpose.". I think it refers to this part of game. I don't think we can define it as a minigame, as it's doesn't have different mechanics as the rest of the game. Above all, when you read the article it seems that this so-called minigame is comparable to Warcraft 3 and Final Fantasy VII ones, whereas it's not. What do you think ?
Is FF6's minigame mentioned on studies on tower defense ?
Elfast (talk) 14:13, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  A tower-defense minigame in Final Fantasy VI ? 

message: I think that Dungeon Keeper (1997) can be seen as a tower-defense game. Then it would be an important one. But the article doesn't not make any reference to this game. What do you think ? Elfast (talk) 14:13, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dungeon Keeper 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Tower defense. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140203062250/http://palgn.com.au/11898/tower-defense-bringing-the-genre-back/ to http://palgn.com.au/article.php?id=11898
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.liberation.fr/actualite/ecrans/290440.FR.php
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gameplanet.co.nz/news/i138234/Kiwi-games-industry-booms/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110125213943/http://blog.games.yahoo.com/blog/260-tower-defense-gets-turned-on-its-head-in-anomaly-warzone-earth to http://blog.games.yahoo.com/blog/260-tower-defense-gets-turned-on-its-head-in-anomaly-warzone-earth
*Added archive http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20090710075045/http%3A//www.handdrawngames.com/DesktopTD/game.asp to http://www.handdrawngames.com/DesktopTD/game.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:03, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In the article, when you scroll to the History of the genre, Space Invaders, Defender and other space shooters are used to describe the beginning of the genre. I will politely ask writers of this article to remove this blasphemy. Tower Defense is defined as placing static Towers, Guns, Creatures, Heroes, etc. , on the screen  in order to defend against the passing creeps. Space Shooter is Not a Tower Defense. Warcraft III Tower Defense is definition of the genre. I do not know if it is first example of such games but as far as I know it is. And I am a pretty active gamer since the mid 80s.
(idk why i can't reply to this comment above me, so im editing it (2022-05-03 diox8tony)) I completely agree with the removal of the entire "Precursor" section...Space Invaders is listed because "creeps attack a base" but Space invaders is more similar to Call of Duty that it is a tower defense. (It has a player controllable gun that can move and shoot at enemies coming to attack you) Only 1 part of that sentence matches a TD and all 3 parts match call of duty.... I don't see Space invaders listed in the FPS genre Precursors. That entire section is misleading, and distracting. If space invaders is a precursor to tower defense, then its a precursor to every single game with attacking monsters. I previewed gameplay of many of the other titles listed in the Precursors section and the relation to Tower Defense is so obscure that we could list those same games for almost every genre of game in history. Its absurd. The one linked source doesn't mention tower defense at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diox8tony (talk • contribs) 22:54, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Space Invaders is Not a Tower Defense!