Talk:Online text-based role-playing game

message: What the hell exactly is an "online text-based role-playing game"?  I highly doubt that such a title exists outside this article, unless it is being used descriptively rather then as an intended title for RPing on message boards (which doesn't have one, and the use of this term as a DESCRIPTIVE probably is in enough to use to get some Google hits - like "black, shiny paint" - but I doubt there's a Wikipedia article called "black shiny paint" that actually refers to paint).  Even if there were a "title" for message board RPing, it would not merit an article.  There are no "rules" or "types" of RPing on message boards, other then whatever rules the members have made up, and whatever setting they've chosen for that particular game.  Yet, this entire article seems to, at a glance, be talking about those "rules", as well as numerous invented terms other then the title of the article.  The existence of this article makes no sense whatsoever, and it really needs to be deleted.Rayvn (talk) 22:41, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that as a term, OTBRPG does not exist. But as a genre they're instrumental to gaming history. I would rather call them "text-based games" as this term seems silly to me. Caliah (talk)
I whole-heartedly agree. With over a decade of experience in both moderation, designing and playing in a number of the article listed sites, I've never heard the term "OTBRPG" outside of this article before. If it is in use, its by such a remarkably small number of people that it doesn't warrant a page for. (Similiar to if I and several friends decided to just abbreviate TFRPGFTSNES for 'the fun role-playing games from the Super Nintendo Entertainment System'.) The article itself is less a compliation of these games and more just notes on etiquette listed in a broad way that doesn't really pertain to many (if any) of the listed games. I agree that this article should be deleted. --Emerald Dreaming (talk) 13:12, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: wth?

message: This article has been raped by fanboys since it's original conception, I'd like to extend heartfelt thanks for the removal of the role play fighting section. My associate and I have recently decided to do a complete overhaul of all our OTBRPG related content, including this article. You can expect a marked improvement within a few weeks. As to the issue of PBP, I noticed that myself. The facts seem to be that both terms have small communities of followers. PBP seems to be a slightly more common term, but in general it seems that the community at large has no real name for what we do. Also, while it may have little bearing, this article is older than the PBP article.
My suggestion would be to make the PBP article (which is used more for advertising than for information it seems) redirect to this article. I may however be biased, being this articles creator. I'll leave it to a more experienced individual to deal with that.
In the mean time, I will work on improving this article. Thank you.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Linkskywalker (talk • contribs) 23:21, 1 August 2005
Just an update - I have not forgotten about this article, and I apologise for the delay, I *am* working on it and keeping it stored localy rather than uploading it until I have it completely finnished. Unfuntunatly, I have a few obligations that take precedence. I apologise for the delay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Linkskywalker (talk • contribs) 14:08, 15 August 2005
*No problem. I'm looking forward to seeing your revisions/additions. I'm watching the page, so, if anything further goes awry, I can take care of it. jglc | t | c 09:42, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Dear God

message: The external links look more like advertisments than links to informative material. Indeed, some of them don't even link to actual OTBRPGS, but rather to MUD type games.
: Agreed.  Words like "excellent" and "immersive" are inappropriate.  I would support removing this page as spam.  Elonka 12:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * This article has had troubles with people spamming the External links, but the whole article isn't spam. If you see an inappropriate external link please feel free to modify/remove it. —gorgan_almighty 13:33, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advertising 

message: I am unaware of any *existing* sources for this topic, aside from forums.
That is, in fact, why I started documenting this type of game.
* I have recently added cited references that back up the claims in this article (see diff). I propose removing the  notice now. —gorgan_almighty 14:58, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources... 

message: Will people please ensure that they are kept in alphabetical order. I have gone through and put them back in order several times, but people keep adding new links out of order. In future if you see the links out of order please but them back in order yourself. Thanks. —gorgan_almighty 11:25, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: The spam notice that someone put at the top of the page doesn't mean that all external links are spam. Some anonymous editor recently removed the links that I added to other sources of NPOV information about OTBRPGs. I added them in an attempt to cite references to the information documented in the article, thus solving the  problem. They were not spam. Please be less hasty when removing external links in future. —gorgan_almighty 14:49, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Don't go overboard removing External links 

message: This is an article for online text-based role-playing, not role-playing itself. There is no need to go to great lengths to describe role-playing when there already exists a separate article for this purpose. {{Caliah 02:22, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do not add additional definitions that can be derived from external articles 

message: Generalisations about popular websites and their impact on the popularity of roleplaying among young adults are lacking references. Roleplaying as a creative medium existed and was popular long before said websites (Gaia Online, Neopets, etc.) were even created. Hence such assertions should come with appropriate reference links. (And please do not use this article as a promotion/endorsement for your own roleplaying websites!!) {{Caliah 02:22, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References needed for generalisations on this topic 

message: Sparring (online role-playing) has been moved to Online text-based role-playing game/Sparring as per the consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sparring (online role-playing) and part or all of it should be merged into the article, after a merger has been done it may be necessary to history merge the history from that page into the main article and then delete the temp page. Pegasus1138Talk | Contribs | Email ---- 21:25, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge  completed. Percy Snoodle 12:38, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger 

message: This is not an appropriate section for this article.  It smacks of the user's bitterness for being ridiculed on some game or other and them taking their frustrations to wikipedia to vent.  I move it be removed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.250.137.144 (talk) 04:36, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, it's unencyclopedic and original research anyway. I've removed it. -kotra (talk) 23:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elitism 

message: A long time ago, I played a computer text-based on-line role-playing game that was completely made of text. I found it on Uncyclopedia, and it was the weirdest game ever. I had to tell the computer to go North, South, East, or West and the computer did it. But when I said, "Quit", the computer made fun of me. The game was a black screen with white text on top like a game you would make on Basic or something. I think that that game should also be placed here. I don't remember the title, but it was indeed strange! 76.192.142.216 (talk) 21:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: From your description here, it sounds like a standard MUD or Zork-type game. I know of a Zork-type game on Uncyclopedia, but I thought it was just something an Uncyclopedia editor made up. If you can find the make of the one you're thinking of, and it's a particularly notable example of its genre (like one of the most popular or innovative or something), maybe it would be relevant to include in this article. But if it's not especially notable to an overview of online text-based RPGs, it would probably be better as just its own article, appropriately categorized so it could be found, or maybe listed on List of text-based computer games if it fits the description. -kotra (talk) 23:15, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are called text adventures.  They still make 'em.Rayvn (talk) 22:41, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Computer Text-based On-line role-playing game 

message: If I'm correct, the article doesn't mention a single(!) example of an on-line text-based role-playing game. No link to a list of such games either. --82.171.70.54 (talk) 00:32, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's tough pinning down individual games as having been instrumental to the development of the genre without adding a whole other list that people might feel to have been important, or add mu* link lists without looking like advertising for that particular list. Perhaps you could do research on some. Caliah (talk) 20:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There are officially approved games of this format out there. One example would be located at www.stsf.net, which is officially linked and sanctioned by the website of StarTrek.com. Aafm (talk) 08:17, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I propose going with Aafm's suggestion and only using officially linked or sanctioned games with a large user base. Otherwise the same problem we encountered on Play-by-post_role-playing_game will happen here and the links section will get used as a means of people advertising their personal games. On that article, we only allow portals and not the games themselves to be linked. --Frugen (talk) 19:34, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example game(s) or link to a list? 

message: Are the references made sufficient?  They are not links, and as far as I can tell, if those articles are online, they are locked behind a paywall.  --68.133.22.25 (talk) 23:09, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Psychology references