Talk:Descent (video game)/Archive 1

Doom release

Doom was released in 1993, not several years before then. Mobygames.com says Descent was released in 1994, not 1993. Mobygames states Descent's minimum requirements as being a 386 DOS-based PC, not a DX2-66 which nearly state of art at the time - is this some kind of joke? :) Crusadeonilliteracy 17:50, 10 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Go ahead and correct any mistakes you see. :-) —Frecklefoot 16:00, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I'm happy to, but I wasn't sure whether Wikipedia is at error or Mobygames is :-)

The retail version of Descent was released in March, 1995. The shareware was released, I think, on December 23, 1994. The 386 requirement is correct, though it ran poorly on a 386. I would say a DX2-66 was the desireable, perhaps recommended, CPU. [Mike Kulas, a founder of Parallax Software.] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.116.35.251 (talk) 23:30, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

System requirements

I doubt Descent required a 486/66. I seem to recall it was a 386/25 or 386/33 or so. (A 486/66 might be required if you turn all the graphics features up to max.)

I have a copy of the game; excuse me whilst I go check. :) -- Grunt   ҈  22:17, 2004 Sep 3 (UTC)

Quote:

IBM PC or 100% compatibles running DOS 5.0 or higher. 386/33 or faster. 4 Megs RAM required. Hard disk required. Hayes compatible modem, 90600 baud or faster required for modem play. Supports (removed long list of joysticks and soundcards). Recommend 486/33 or faster with 8 Megs or more RAM.

So it requires a 386/33 but runs best on a 486/33. -- Grunt   ҈  22:20, 2004 Sep 3 (UTC)

So primitive...yet so fun. It's too bad I don't have the (original) game anymore...*relishes in lost memories*

Release date

The release dates listed on this page are not consistent within the article, or with other sources. The infobox says Feb. 28, 1995, but the article states it was released in 1994. MobyGames.com lists it as being released on March 17, 1995. Does anyone have any sources that back up the other dates, or should it be changed to match MobyGames? Mimir 00:06, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

The retail version was released in February 1995, and the shareware demo was released in December 1994. Spartan 234 01:36, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Shareware edition?

The very first release of Descent, Shareware version 1.0, was in December 1994. I can't seem to find a date more precise than that. There's not very much discussion of the shareware edition of Descent in this article, do you think it would be a good idea to come up with some?

Here's what I have on the Mac version: It contained the first 3 levels of the game, unlike the PC version, which also contained the 7th level. It was networkable, although only on anarchy mode. Maximum weaponry in the Mac version was Laser/Vulcan/Spread in energy weapons, and Concussion/Homing/Bomb for secondary. -tangent 04:27, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Some discussion of D1/D2 Internet play on Kali?

Hi, I added just a brief mention that Descent and Descent II were popular online over Kali. I wanted to see it in the article as I spent years of my life obsessing on playing D2 on Kali. I'd like to expand the multiplayer section of the article at some point.

You should sign your article so we know who you are :) If you need help with the multiplayer section contact me. I have been playing it online since '98 or so. Kali, Kahn, even Heat. Jsderwin 12:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Descent 3

I can't believe that there's so little information on Descent 3 in here. That was such a fun game! I know it was a complete flop, but it was almost as fun as the original. I think I'm going to add more info on Descent 3 and create a Descent 3 article. bob rulz 22:30, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

If you do/did that, please point us to it. Shadowfury333 19:16, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

I didn't end up putting a lot of information in. I did put in the Descent 3 weapons thing, but I realized that I didn't know as much about Descent 3 as I thought I did, and I really didn't know what else to put in there. I also decided against a Descent 3 article, partly for the same reasons, and partly because Descent II didn't have its own article either. bob rulz 01:43, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

Sci-Fi Channel, Descent movie?

What is the entry regarding the Sci-Fi Channel making a movie based on Descent about? Is it true?

If you google "descent movie sci-fi", imdb shows that there is a "descent" movie being produced by sci-fi, but it is unrelated to this title. I'm removing this information from the article. Timbatron 23:00, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Split into Descent 1 / Descent 2 / Descent 3?

This page has become rather cluttered because it tries to handle a discussion of all three Descent titles. May I suggest that we break this article into three sections? Each of the three pages would have a box at the bottom (i.e. "Descent Trilogy" linking all three pages).

Descent Contains information on Descent 1, the PlayStation port, along with weapons, robots, and themes relevant to Descent 1.

Descent 2 Information on Descent 2, its cousin Descent Maximum on the PlayStation, new features (Guidebot, Thiefbot), items, weapons, and locations.

Descent 3 A more in-depth treatment of Descent 3. The storyline therein, weapons, robots, maps, background on the Fusion Engine.

Although I can see how D1/D2 are closely related, Descent 3 was quite different technically. When this page delves into the technical aspects of the games, it's difficult to track if it means the original engine or the Fusion Engine.

- i think this is a good idea. i could probably even provide some help with descent 1 article. Tani unit 08:25, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I could do stuff with the Descent 3 article. It's been a long time since I played it but I think I remember enough...bob rulz 08:27, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I've tagged the article; I support article-splitting in this case. It's up to rest of you now...whether you want a 40KB+ page, or three slightly smaller articles and one disambiguation page. If you do, then I'll help out with Descent 3. - A. Exeunt 04:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

We seriously need to split this article soon. The current version seems to centre more on Descent and Descent II. In the meantime, very little attention seems to be given to Descent 3. Come on, people! I know Descent 3 was not successful and all that, but can't we even give it its proper share of attention? You people are making it as though Descent 3 never even existed in the first place! It is still a great game! -- A. Exeunt 05:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Why not simply rename the article from Descent (computer game) into Descent (computer game series)? Then article could then be divided within the page

I can see splitting Descent 1 and 2 from 3, mainly because 1 and 2 are so alike. 3 uses a different engine altogether, creating a different look. Madd the sane 05:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

- I was the one that originally called for the split in this comment. Since it hasn't happened yet, I believe it may be worthwhile to discuss how we may split this article. It is over 52 KB and literally festering with superfluous content. If I find time, I might wind up doing the split, but trimming a lot of the fat while I'm at it. In general, I believe we should split into three articles, Descent, Descent II, and Descent 3.

Descent contains anything related to Descent 1 and things that apply to the series as a whole, such as the Telep novels, the alledged movie, and so forth. Its main purpose should be to present the story of Descent 1, cover the gameplay (including weapons and notable mechanics), etc. This is also where the PlayStation version should be discussed, along with D1X. Similar to the "Mega Man" article, this should be a springboard page that provides the summary for what the series as a whole is about.

Descent II is all about Descent 2. Again, it continues the above as it applies to this game. It would also cover Descent Maximum and the Vertigo Series, along with the D2X and D2X-XL projects.

Descent 3 should, of course, talk about Descent 3. But specifically call out differences from the other two (most notably the engine), reliance on objective-based gameplay, etc.

I would also move to strike anything more than passing references to FreeSpace and Red Faction. These games have their own sections. Here is not the place to speculate to why FreeSpace 2 was a commercial flop. Kyouryuu 04:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The charge has begun! -- A. Exeunt 03:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

The change continues! Basically, it's the same article as this one with the Descent I and 3 parts cut out.Madd the sane 00:56, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

All I can say is that Descent (one) is important enough to warrant a seperate article (from two, three, etc). Vranak 17:24, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, since we now have individual articles, do you think that it would be a good idea to remove non-d1 info from this page? I already did, but someone reverted at least the weapons back. What would be a good compromise? -Madd the sane 07:19, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

We've already split the article, so we had better make the other two articles more obvious. In the meantime, we just have to keep removing non-D1 stuff from this article. -- Altiris Exeunt 08:02, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll be removing the split tag once all non-D1 information has been removed from this article, and instead place another tag on top so that people will know where to go from there. -- Altiris Exeunt 08:05, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

IPX

There needs to be a tutorial on how to play D1 or D2 on IPX or something... I mean, if someone's looking up Descent on Wikipedia, then they obviously don't know that much about it. So, they would have NO IDEA what you mean when you say 'Kali' or IPX or 'Kahn'.

-68.64.175.222 16:35, 10 January 2006 (UTC) (Hotdog003, Whitecat on Kali)

Still playable?

I am having problems running this game in Windows XP. Yes, I have tried DosBox. I can get the game to run in DosBox but it's slow and the music doesn't play. If running Descent requires some special setting in DosBox, I think maybe the article should mention that. --Nerd42 02:20, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Somebody told me there was a patch to get the game to quit running at super-speed without DoxBox, but I tried it and so far it no workee --Nerd42 15:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Descent3 should work in Windows XP. As for Descent and Descent II, I highly recommend that you download D2X-XL [1], a port of Descent II to OpenGL. It is available for Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X. It will play the original Descent levels if you put their data files into the program's folder. Of course, the original Descent II data files are needed as well if you wish to play the full version of the game. (D2X-XL comes with the demo files: levels 1-3.) OneofThem 13:36, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Descent 3 works on my computer, which is running Windows XP, so no worries. If you get any problems with extra levels, then delete them. The original levels, as well as Mercenary, and even some extra levels like the five WindMine levels by TrueLightGuild, work fine. - A. Exeunt 04:29, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I've got them all - when I get home I know what I'm gonna be doing :) --Nerd42 15:41, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Dude! This stuff ain't workin. I can see the menus crashes when I try to start a game. :( --Nerd42 18:24, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I dunno if you'll believe this, but I actually managed to install both 1 and 2 on Windows XP Home Edition using Windows 95 Compatibility Mode. The only issue I have is that the music becomes this awful fuzzy crackle, and I can't save. I mean, it'll record which Level I'm on, but I can't, say, save my progress right in front of some reactor or something. So music and save doesn't work, but the rest is awesome. Considering the last time I played I was like 2 and sitting on my dad's lap to control the weapons, I'm pretty pleased with what I did. Oh, and the weirdest thing is that 3 won't run. The music doesn't work and it crashes every time you try and shoot. To use a boring phrase, 'They sure don't make them like they used to.' --RedZion--

Amazing, RedZion. Descent 3 works on mine. You could try visiting PlanetDescent for help. -- A. Exeunt 09:13, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually I must recommend D2X for playing Descent and Descent II. I've tried D2X-XL but I think that guy just added too much stuff and at least for me some of it causes crashes and such. For the truly original experience, get D2X!

D2X is outdated, buggy and not maintained any more. Apart from that, a few features of the original game are missing. So much for the 'truly original experience'. D2X-XL on the other side is very stable, and you can hide all features you don't want by turning off 'expert' options display. D2X-XL is the way to go. The author reacts very fast to bug reports, so if problems occur, approaching him first instead of dumping the program wouldn't be the worst idea.

Alternatively you can try D2X-Rebirth, which is less feature rich.

Does anybody know of any way to play this on XP networked?

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.233.203.231 (talk • contribs) 09:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC2)

Star Trek tech

"Descent technology vs. Star Trek technology"? What the [expletive deleted]? Am I the only one to consider that chapter a worthless case of pure personal speculation? - 194.89.3.138 12:40, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Probably, because it's not POV. There are alot of other things covered on WP that are alot more speculative. I think the section helps people get an understading of the Descent universe. --Nerd42 14:31, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I gotta agree, i also think that a chapter about descent vs. star trek is making the whole article longer than it has to be, without adding something really important about the game. it seems like it's not even reflecting any major discussion in the fanbase. i'd remove that whole section! --PeeAeMKay 15:09, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

oh shoot for a second there I thought you were agreeing with me. :( --Nerd42 18:33, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't really add anything informative, I vote for its deletion. 80.186.36.122 16:27, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad someone has already brought up the issue. Sorry, but I really can't see the relevance of this chapter. It reads as a huge stretch of speculation which doesn't do anything for the game. I've got no problem with discussing the technology in the Descent universe, but trying to compare it to Star Trek.... it doesn't work for me. -Kazashi

It's pointless, probably counts as original research or speculation, and (most importantly) Descent is a freaking FPS shoot-em-up. The original game's technology has almost nothing to do with the plot and doesn't need to be explained. AustinZ 03:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm deleting that section. It might not violate WP:NPOV, but it does violate WP:NOR and WP:CITE. --Bletch 14:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

That's a load of crap. All research is original research. --Nerd42 15:34, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps, but that doesn't change Wikipedia policy. If you don't like that policy, you should probably discuss it on the relevant talk page. --Bletch 03:23, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

It's been awhile since this page was updated, but I do remember that similar discussion used to take place on the Descent BB and the PlanetDescent forums. --D3matt 21:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Flares

"Descent 3 flares cost 1 energy per 20 fired. They are not a free-fired tool..."

I doubt that. I can fire Flares on the Pyro-GL and Black Pyro-GX when these ships have 000 energy, but on the Phoenix and Magnum-AHT, it appears to be one energy per 5 fired. I'm not too sure, because I now use the GL a lot. - A. Exeunt 04:34, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

However, if I remember correctly, in all of the Descent games, if you get to zero energy, you can still fire flares. This was done deliberately so that while playing the single player game, you would still be able to open doors, shoot control panels (D2), and access various switches.

Flare Wars were a pretty hilarious way to kill an hour or so, especially in Descent 3. I can remember a few good ones I had playing "Stadium" and "The Veins."

I can't remember if killing someone with a flare generated a weapon specific message. If you killed someone with the mass driver, for instance, it'd say "so-and-so targets so-and-so for mass destruction" but whether there was a similar announcement for flare deaths, I can't recall.

I think it was something like "[attacker]'s flare has ignited [target]'s fuel leak!". 68.64.175.222 23:56, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Correct. If you visit PlanetDescent, they have some PotDs that portray this message. - A. Exeunt 04:34, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

There is a mission in D3:Mercenary where you are stripped of weapons and energy when infiltrating a base. To continue, you must blow up some barrels on the floor to make an opening. Barrels can be blown up with flares (tested) but you cannot fire them (the game replies "not enough energy to fire flare) unless you find some energy and a superlaser(?) weapon somewhere past the barrels. My question: is that fact a localised in-level state, a global level state, a "Mercenary-global" state or a D3 State?

POV and OR issues

There is a ton of fanboyism in this piece. I love descent, but we need a better article about it. For instance, this paragraph:

Descent's continued success stems mostly from multi-player, online play where the ability to "trichord" (sliding in 3 directions at once, which gave the player a speed boost of approximately 77%) made ship movements unique and challenging to predict. The game continued to be popular 10 years after its release in small pockets of online players due to "trichording". The decline of the series with the release of the third, Descent 3, is widely considered to be the fault of the loss of "trichording" (which is still possible, but much less effective or necessary) and other important differences between Descent 3 and the first two games in the series. The Descent series never continued into the planned Descent IV due to name ownership issues that arose.

is seriously inappropriate and speculative. It's full of unsourced, unverifiable assertions that really sound of out place in an encyclopedia. The rest of the article also has problems with second person voice ("you", instead of "the player"), tone, and language. Night Gyr 14:12, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

In that case, we will need the cleanup tag. Either that or we could try article splitting. -- A. Exeunt 07:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Definitely agree with this point. The article looks quite unprofessional thanks to that and spending too much time on unimportant data. -- 58.28.156.83 21:20, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Article Size

Imo the article contains a lot of overly detailled information, like the exact weapon descriptions, making it look more like a manual in parts.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.233.173.211 (talk • contribs) 00:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC2)

Agreed. The most sensible choice would be to simply split the article into a Descent, Descent 2, and Descent 3 article. Are there any active editors who would be willing to assist in such a division? --tjstrf 06:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I would be willing to assist the creation of articles for Descents II and 3.--Esuriat Corinths 21:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Count me in. On a 'weekly basis', though. -- A. Exeunt 05:48, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

The charge has begun! -- A. Exeunt 03:32, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

System Requirements, anyone?

Okay...I've thrown in the minimum system requirements for Descent 3. Can someone else do the system requirements for Descent and Descent II please? -- A. Exeunt 09:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Added minimum system requirements for Descent 1 and II; source: the Official Descent I and II FAQ v3.1 (from Wayback Machine)

Descent 3: Retribution

I've updated the section with details regarding the name of the player in the game and the ending of Descent 3. --KSweeley 12:45, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Name: Horus

Can anyone give solid evidence that the Material Defender was called Horus? I express my doubts as he was only known as either 'Material Defender' or 'MD1032' in Descent 3, and as far as the Descent II intro is concerned, he was known simply as 'Material Defender'.

The claimed link in FreeSpace 2 seems extremely tenuous. It is initially stated as "rumor" (Material Defender missions in FreeSpace) and then treated as fact ("Horus"). I never heard of this until now and I've been playing these games for years. This seems like nothing more than fanboy speculation. This is further refuted by the Descent novels, where he is called Benjamin St. John. If the MatDef had an accepted real name from the games, it would have been used in the novels. Kyouryuu 04:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll remove them then. Until we can get a reliable source for these two links, they will remain out (besides, this page is 50 kilobytes long already). -- A. Exeunt 09:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Into Cerberon

Even though Into Cerberon's a Doom 3 mod, I felt it should be listed under the Descent Fan Sites heading because it uses the Doom 3 engine for Descent gameplay. Granted, it's a work in progress, but there's been a lot of progress since it was started. --SpecOp Macavity 22:38, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Screenshots

Maybe there should a a picture of descent 3 ingame? The cover of Mercenary isn't looking good all by itself. Xsaii 23:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

It will be done. -- A. Exeunt 01:26, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

It is done. -- A. Exeunt 01:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Vertigo series levels

An add-on for Descent II containing twenty user-made levels (and three secret levels) from a Computer Gaming World level design competition,

Really? Levels 2 and 4 were done by Dan Wentz. [Interview with Dan Wentz.] I removed all mention of the level design competition, but if someone can find a ref for that, please add it back. --Kjoonlee 07:58, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Agreed - although I can't prove the levels had nothing to do with a competition, I have good reason to doubt it -

• Vertigo levels often feature flickering lights, something that - to my knowledge - was not available to anyone outside Parallax at the time, as it wasn't until the release of Vertigo that the game even supported it I believe
• Simply put, I've seen the quality of the levels in early mapping competitions for Descent - nobody was anywhere near as good as the Parallax guys at what they did at that time, and I suspect if someone else had made a level it would be obvious - but the Vertigo levels were actually more intricate than Counterstrike, which is completely at odds with where the community was at at that stage.

- Sirius-NZ 14:04, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Soundtrack information for Descent II--

Could somebody please post the soundtrack information for Descent II (the s3d ViRGE version, I dont know if it's the same) I know that some of the artists are Type O Negative and Skinny Puppy, but (for the life of me) I can't figure out what the track names are. I could use some help, thanks.

Jaimez Bling -

```edit - found track names:

Descent II Soundtrack:

Track 2 (Vi 1): Title by Brian Luzietti

Track 3: Crawl by Brian Luzietti

Track 4 (Vi 2): Glut by Ogre of Skinny Puppy & Mark Walk

Track 5 (Vi 3): Gunner Down by Brian Luzietti

Track 6: Cold Reality by Larry Peacock & Brad Cross & Leslie Spitzer

Track 7: Ratzez by Ogre of Skinny Puppy & Mark Walk

Track 8: Crush by Brian Luzietti

Track 9 (Vi 4): Untitled by Mark Morgan

Track 10: Haunted (Instrumental Remix) by Type O Negative - Original version available on their album "October Rust", published by Roadrunner Records

Track 11: Are You Descent? by Ron Valdez

Track 12 (Vi 5): Techno Industry by Johann Langlie

Track 13: Robot Jungle by Johann Langlie

• (Vi #) indicates which track number is on S3 ViRGE Descent II Promo Disc.

Challenging trichording...

The article states: The series has a strong following due to its unique type of gameplay, particularly its 6DOF and challenging trichording. I'm a little confused as to what the article writer meant by "challenging trichording" as Wikipedia's definition of the word "trichord" doesn't mesh with Descent's gameplay. It's a musical term, if I'm not mistaken. Someone like to clarify this? Peter1968 11:26, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

It's Descent jargon for travelling along three axes, instead of one or two. --Kjoonlee 12:39, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Never heard of it, and I played all three games to death. Nonetheless, it's not clear what the term means to the average punter that'd drop on by to this article. So, the jargon aspect of it probably should be explained in the article. Peter1968 06:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I used to visit the DBB, ZappaFan's, PlanetDescent, D2.com, and D-3.com, and I think it was fairly well-known to the people there, at the time. --Kjoonlee 11:09, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree some info should be added to clarify what trichording means. --Kjoonlee 11:19, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, Straferunning is now linked from the article. --Kjoonlee 16:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Tri-chording means pressing the controls for moving forward, up/downwards and sidewards simultaneously, allowing the player to move much faster than when just pressing only a single or two movement keys, as the accelerations sum up in Descent, giving you a speed of sqrt (3 * thrust * thrust). It's called "chording" because you have to press a "chord" of several keys to make it happen. Karx11erx (talk) 13:28, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

You couldn't compete in the IDL without knowing how to trichord. Among the first things you learn when you play competitive descent. --Jsderwin (talk) 03:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Trichording was unintentional. You could call it a bug, or luck, as it turned out to be significant in Descent. In any event, we didn't plan it. Also, I think the equation for speed is likely incorrect. I think speed would be sqrt(forward_thrust^2 + lateral_thrust^2 + vertical_thrust^2). We routinely dual-chorded (though we didn't call it that) during development, but I didn't see trichording, or for some reason even think of it, until someone showed it to me several months after launch. [Mike Kulas, Parallax Software founder.] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.116.35.251 (talk) 23:35, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Player named "rio"

FTA: "One player, "rio", developed a system in which he used two joysticks." I've never heard of "rio" and neither has google, so without any source for this, it seems like some random player decided to add this about themselves. Using two joysticks always seemed kind of obvious to me. If someone can cite a source, please add it back. Timbatron 18:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Material vs. Materiel

On the main page, as well as in most places, the player is reffered to as "Material Defender". This is not in accordance, to the game where the player is known as "Materiel Defender". Note that the "E" in place of the "A" changes the meaning of the word.

(from Dictionary.com):

Material -

• the substance or substances of which a thing is made or composed.
• anything that serves as crude or raw matter to be used or developed.
• any constituent element.

Materiel -

• the aggregate of things used or needed in any business, undertaking, or operation.
• (Military) arms, ammunition, and equipment in general.

The second definition of "materiel" seems to make the most sense for the game.

The player was called "materiel defender" throughout the first two installments of the game, I'm pretty sure of that. At this point, however, I do not modify the main article, because I am not familiar with later installments, and I cannot be sure whether the title was changed to "material defender" later on. Can someone elaborate? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Drst (talk • contribs) 2006-11-20T13:01:51 (UTC)

No, in D1, Dravis says to the player, "That is all, material defender. Prepare for descent." --Kjoonlee 13:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. I confirmed that you are right. Now I wonder why I thought it was Materiel. Especially, when such a word does exist, although is rarely used. Weird. My bad. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Drst (talk • contribs) 2006-11-20T22:52:23 (UTC)

DOOM clone? I don't think so

from the intro:

"Being regarded as a Doom clone by casual gamers meant that Descent's unique aspects were often overlooked, confining it to a niche."

I think this is a bit mendatious. Who could or would ever mistake Descent for a DOOM clone? This sounds like 'invented memory syndrome'. Vranak 17:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

We were grouped with Doom clones. There was at least one print magazine article that covered a group of the Doom clones. It bothered me, but what can you do. I believe PC Gamer did a preview that called us "Doom Killer?", but with the question mark. I sort of recall a quote from John Romero saying something like, "Dark Forces and Descent are cool, the rest just don't get it." [Mike Kulas, cofounder, Parallax Software.] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.116.35.251 (talk) 23:38, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Mouse Support

I modified the controlers portion of the article to mention that mouse support was enabled from the beginning. I was playing with a mouse and keyboard in 1995. --D3matt 21:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Multiplayer

"Descent III also had several new types of multiplayer games out of the box, with a few more created by fans later. The original modes of play from Descent 1 & 2 that were included were Anarchy, a game mode where players compete for the most kills within the time limit, and Team Anarchy, which was a variation of the former. Descent III added Capture the Flag, in which players had to attempt to steal an enemy flag and take it back to their base while their team was still in possession of their own flag,"

Anarchy had no time limit. It lasted until someone blew the reactor. Using D1X you could set the reactor to invulnerable for a period of time, but it would still continue indefinitely until the reactor was destroyed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.151.80.157 (talk) 15:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

As far as I remember, Descent2 had CTF. I built CTF features into some of my maps. CTF was not new in Descent 3.

Descent 2 had indeed CTF, but the implementation had a few flaws, like the flags re-appearing at random positions in the level, and also players respawning randomly after having been killed, which could lead to severe imbalances in D2 CTF games. Another D2 multiplayer game mode was "hoard" - you needed the Vertigo expansion for it though.

D3 btw. also added Monsterball and Entropy game modes. Karx11erx (talk) 13:22, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

First-Person Shooter or not?

I have an issue with calling Descent an fps. I think the difference between Descent and first-person shooters is obvious. Sure, Descent has a first person camera and is a shooter, but by that definition TIE Fighter is also a first person shooter. We need to decide on the definition of fps is.

74.109.137.125 06:37, 22 December 2006 (UTC)Aquillar

It's a zero-G shooter, ie. a member of a specific genre with gameplay that is clearly distinct from the likes of terminal velocity, let alone tie fighter.Undeaf (talk) 15:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Convex cubes

There is a line that states "cubes must be convex". From personal experience I know that, while convex cubes are in general less prone to errors, that is not strictly true (at least reading the definition of "convex" that it links to). If anyone knows better than I do what the limitations are, I would suggest editing as appropriate. - Sirius-NZ 08:28, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I am confused about that, too. I always though a cube is a regular hexahedron. But then it says they can get deformed, which wouldn't make them regular anymore. Than it says they should stay convex, but i dont see how a hexahedron cannot be convex. The paragraph is not very clear, and doesn't seem to cite sources. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.157.73.224 (talk) 15:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

Concave cubes (or better: segments) will lead to the engine not handling collisions and transitions of an object from one segment to an adjacent one properly any more (in other words: objects will get stuck there, depending on the degree of being concave). Karx11erx (talk) 13:20, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

D2X-XL controversy section

====Controversy==== ''D2X-XL'', unlike other modified versions of ''Descent'', grants the user the ability to change some settings in a way that can affect and change online gameplay. There has been an ongoing discussion among Descent online players whether or not these settings give a player the ability to gain an unfair advantage when playing against others in a multiplayer setting. As such features are under full control of the game host and are completely disabled if the game host does not use D2X-XL to avoid any imbalances in multiplayer matches, there is however little grounds left for such concerns. Alright, I'm not even sure this should be here. True, there is a controversy surrounding the issue - however making claims about what "people think" about it is quite dangerous without actually backing them up with sources (preferably polls and the like).

I'd recommend, if you see something of the like, stating that "there have been complaints" and citing a source, even if it is to a thread on a forum where people are whining about the issue. At least then people can't disagree with you. - Sirius-NZ 09:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the section. I felt it served no purpose, as it consisted merely of the (unreferenced and unqualified) statement of two unnecessary and conflicting viewpoints: that there are too many new features, and that they are inconsequential and should not be cause for concern. --DCrazy talk/contrib 07:29, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that section was completely out of whack. It had been added by the same people who are now constantly vandalizing the D2X-XL section. Their motivation are personal issues with the D2X-XL author (me). I only left it there to avoid an editing rage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karx11erx (talk • contribs) 10:26, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

D2X-XL and DXX-Rebirth sections in breach of Wikipedia policies?

Below text seems to be source of dispute. I have moved it here for the time being, and I ask kindly that both sides iterate their reasonings. It was also out of style. Ong elvin (talk) 10:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Removed temporarily

=== D2X-XL === D2X-XL was initially spawned from the D2X project as a Windows-specific development branch, ''D2X-W32'', to fix issues present in D2X while adding new features, such as the ability to play Descent 1 missions in Descent 2. This branch was originally titled D2X-W32 but was ported to Linux and Mac OS X later on, and renamed to D2X-XL to reflect both the broader scope and greatly expanded feature set of the project. The new features available in ''D2X-XL'' include colored lighting, smoke, real-time shadowing, new weapon effects, support for improved textures and 3D models, as well as new game modes. Like other ports, it is fully compatible with the original game and can be configured to present the original look and feel of ''Descent'' – without the graphical updates and other features – if desired.

=== DXX-Rebirth === DXX-Rebirth is a source port of the ''Descent'' and ''Descent II'' engines providing OpenGL graphics and effects. It is based on the ''D1X'' and ''D2X'' projects, and aims to allow ''Descent'' to be played on modern operating systems, while remaining faithful to the look of the original game. Development includes work on a software renderer, which would make it possible to port the game to hardware not offering [[OpenGL]] support, such as game consoles. DXX-Rebirth is currently available for Linux, Mac (D2) and Windows.

Discussion

For a start, the sources are in the wrong spot, there's a reference section for that, and not using the appropriate reference tags. The complaint against D3Bubbalou is also out of place. DXX also hasn't been shown to fulfill WP:N, and the section is, as mentioned, a mess of MoS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ong elvin (talk • contribs) 10:20, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

The issue should be resolved by a Wikipedia editor looking over the sections and removing them if they are not in accordance with the Wikipedia policies. I had added the comment about D3Bubbalou because there doesn't seem to be a way to get somebody to do something about the constant vandalizing of the D2X-XL section. Karx11erx (talk) 10:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

This reminds me of the handling for Freespace 2. The source code project is mentioned separately, with only a small mention and link in the Development section. I suggest this issue be resolved similarly. The actions of this D3Bubbalou weren't malicious, he just failed to explain his actions clearly. They are a step in the right direction. I wouldn't quite call it advertising, but you definitely need to point out why it should be there. Ong elvin (talk) 11:02, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Bubbalou's actions most definitely are malicious. If you knew him and his stance towards D2X-XL and the D2X-XL author (me) you'd acknowledge that. Just consider how biased his actions are. What speaks against a D2X-XL sections also speaks against the DXX-Rebirth section, if not even more so. Yet he leaves it untouched. There is a thread on www.descentbb.net where he is ranting against D2X-XL and its Wikipedia entry. I have nothing agsinst the D2X-XL entry being deleted if there is no justification for it, but then the Rebirth entry will have to go as well, because there would hardly be more reason for it to stay than for the XL entry then. Currently, there is more speaking for the XL section staying than for the Rebirth section.

Do you happen to be Master Of Puppets? I am asking because I had explained the significance of D2X-XL for the current Descent community to him in his talk area. It's basically the oldest Descent 2 port to OpenGL that is still actively maintained, and has breathed new life into Descent 1 and Descent 2, particularly after having become available for Linux and Mac OS X. Current download numbers suggest at least 5000 D2X-XL users, which is quite a lot given the state of the Descent community before D2X-XL. I think it therefore has a place in the Descent article. Rebirth has come at least a year later.

The graphical and gameplay enhancements are a significant property of D2X-XL and distinguish it from any other Descent 2 version. The main argument why Descent players prefer XL or Rebirth usually is exactly "it's for all the new features XL offers" or "it's because Rebirth looks so similar to the original game". Therefore this property ("new features" vs. "classic look") is pretty central in the perception of Descent players. There have been repeated discussions about that in the Descent community forums (which due to the nature of a forum may be hard to dig up though).

As far as advertising or being biased goes: The current XL text has been written by a member of the Descent community who knows both games, but is not a close friend or a relative of mine. So there is no point in constantly cluttering the XL section with advert tags and leaving the Rebirth section alone. Anyway, if Wikipedia is not right place for such stuff, remove the entries. *Both* of them. But stop this bloody war of this bloody troll already. Karx11erx (talk) 12:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Removed the part about vandalism and the misplaced links. Karx11erx (talk) 13:02, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Weird that I keep seeing Ong Elvin around here... Anyway, the section does seem slightly similar to an advertisement to me. The problem is that it doesn't assert notability, or show why it is notable enough to be mentioned. Going into this much detail without sources is pushing the guidelines quite a bit. You could possibly get away with attaching it to the source code section, citing it as an example of how players have taken advantage of the code's release, but I'm wary about doing that, even.

In terms of D3Bubbalou's actions, seems like he was just trying to help, 'cept he didn't explain what he was doing. Master of Puppets <sub>Call me MoP! :)</sub> 21:28, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I am starting to wonder whether you are understanding the entire issue. First of all, what the hell is an advertisement about the D2X-XL section? Explain it! The feature set has been greatly expanded! The new features are what is making the program attractive to many Descent players who had stopped playing the game and started again because of D2X-XL! And if it is an advertisement, why wouldn't the Rebirth section be one, please? So either way, Bubbalou always only targeting the D2X-XL section, together with his history of personal attacks on me on descentbb.net, makes it pretty clear that he is very very biased about his "help" here! Apart from that, how hard is it to understand that the new features of D2X-XL are a significant property of the program, distinguishing it from the original software? It's the D2X-XL and Rebirth features (or lack thereof), that are a constant cause of dispute in the Descent community. I am starting to wonder whether you don't *want* to understand.

Anyway, if the XL section is an advertisement, the Rebirth section definitely is one, too, so both have to go. That should be easy enough to grasp. Karx11erx (talk) 00:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

No, I ain't MoP. I just sorta kinda lurk around the games articles. Well... I wasn't aware of this history you mention, and I ain't gonna check into it (not worth my time)... but I would still say it's a step in the right direction. I'll merge the Technology and 3rd-party Dev sections, and rename it as "Development" because that's what other articles are doing. I think it should be pretty clear that naming DX1 + DX2 in separate subsections is overdoing it; find some title to put both of them under and just leave a sentence and link. I'm going to remove links which are not specifically dealing with Descent 1 because there's already separate articles for Descent 2, 3, FS1, and FS2. I will definitely remove the link to Descendarium, because Wikipedia ain't a guide. I'll also remove the link to DescentBBs (WP:ELNO #10), Top25(WP:ELNO #13), Holger Bredel (dead link), and Descent Rangers (WP:ELNO #4, #10). There also seems to have been a push lately to remove MobyGames links, so we'll see about that. Ong elvin (talk) 00:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

If there's an umbrella project for the DXX subprojects, sub that in. I've left the DXX links in for the time being. Ong elvin (talk) 00:23, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't have to "understand" to know that comparable articles do not link to mods or improvement projects in the main article in such a fashion as was attempted here. No matter the feature set, it's still sort of a side-thing to the main article. They're usually worthy of mention, but normally just mentioned in passing. Consider Oblivion and Morrowind which have a vast number of mods, but only get an umbrella mention. Half-Life gets a similar umbrella mention, with a section devoted to Modding since it was pushed as a major feature (there's a whole mod section in the main menu of the game), Quake III: Arena too. I think you'd be hard pressed to find a quality article that mentions specific mods in-depth in the same article as the parent game. Ong elvin (talk) 00:35, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

That's alright with me, as long as the XL and the Rebirth section get the same treatment. I am not trying to keep the XL section in the Wikipedia by all means, I am trying to get equal treatment for all comparable sections. So if they have to go, no problem at all for me. When I was asking for reasons of qualifying the XL section as advertisement, I did that because that point had come up here, but it was never central for me apart from it being an argument against the Rebirth section as well. What I basically say is: Treat all sections similar to the XL section equally, and not delete one but keep another. Karx11erx (talk) 10:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

That said, the source code projects for Descent 1 and 2 are actually quite a major part of the game these days - they're literally the only reason anyone's still playing it. So they deserve a mention, even if just in passing. -- Sirius-NZ (talk) 11:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. The orignal game (Descent 2, or its win95 and d2_3dfx versions) only works on legacy hardware that is really hard to get by or maintain. D2X doesn't work well, crashes often, fails to implement all features Descent 2 has (e.g. the various cockpits), and has massive flaws in its usage of OpenGL (e.g. rendering flaws because no Z-buffering is applied). D2X-XL and DXX-Rebirth actually are the only programs you can play Descent 1 and 2 with on modern hardware and OS-s. Without these programs, there wouldn't even be a Descent 1/2 community anymore, and these games would be dead.

But is this notable anywhere else, 'tis the question. To be honest, so far everything is just dealing in assertions; that isn't enough to include something in the article. You can mention that the source code was released, but D2X-XL seems to have little notability aside from being just another mod that happens to be used by a large portion of Descent players. Master of Puppets <sub>Call me MoP! :)</sub> 07:02, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, then just leave it out, I'm fine with that. As I said, I am not looking for a "privileged status" or so for D2X-XL. I am more concerned about all similar contributions to the Descent article being treated equally. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karx11erx (talk • contribs) 14:52, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Controllers section accuracy

And this is another one I don't like much. Firstly, grammatically I don't think it's written well but that's not the main issue.

It's mostly all the comments about "keyboard didn't really work" and "cheap joysticks were not much good" - not in those words but still. Who says? Was there any research that proved that a keyboard/mouse combo was not effective? If there wasn't, this material shouldn't be here. If there was, it should be cited.

Oh, and finally - "However, fan-made Windows XP patches for Descent and Descent II enable the mouse+keyboard combination." - that makes it sound like D1/2 didn't support mouse and keyboard under XP, which is just plain wrong. Is it trying to say they improve its usefulness? If so why is it under the Descent 3 section? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sirius-NZ (talk • contribs) 10:08, 7 February 2007 (UTC).

As I remember it mouse control was not supported at all in Descent & Descent II. Keyboard only or joystick with keyboard control was supported though. Descent 3 was the first to feature native mouse control.The Goat 21:18, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Mouse support was available long before Descent 3. I think I'm just going to remove the section altogether, because without some sort of research into the controller setups used by people a decade ago there's no sense in keeping it. --DCrazy talk/contrib 08:52, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Mouse support wasn't new with D3, but mouselook support was. --Kjoonlee 04:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Could you explain the difference between "mouse support" and "mouse look"? What was the mouse used for if not to look around (change the facing of the ship in the game)? The Goat 20:37, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Mouse support means you can use the mouse to turn. The turn rate is still limited to that imposed by Parallax Software. Mouselook means you can use the mouse to turn as fast as you can move the mouse. If you increase the mouse's sensitivity, your maximum turn rate goes up as well. Mouselook was added to D3 partly to lure Quake users who were used to mouselook. --Kjoonlee 20:52, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

IIRC mouselook could be disabled by the gamehost, kind of like how D2X-XL gamehosts can enable/disable their features. --Kjoonlee 21:01, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

As to the "keyboard did not work", I know that with many keyboards, they couldn't handle the amount of simultaneous commands that some keyboard players needed to play effectively. If you were tri-chording, while firing lasers and missiles and tried to turn, often the system would beep at you because the keyboard bufer was full. On better keyboards this was not an issue. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.61.34.111 (talk • contribs).

Did that happen in DOS? AFAIK the beeping was done by Windows; in DOS, it was a limitation due to key jamming. --Kjoonlee 04:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

The keyboard buffer was always an issue for keyboard players. I had a keyboard that worked most of the time but still it would beep at me on occasion. This didn't prevent some keyboard players from being some of the best players, but it didn't seem to matter if it was in windows or DOS. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.151.80.157 (talk) 15:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

I think your memory has become a little mixed up; what makes the computer beep is DirectInput. I had no beeps when I played Star Control in DOS. There isn't really an n-key buffer at the keyboard either; key jamming occurs because of the circuitry of the keys. Keyboard Matrix Help --Kjoonlee 17:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about. MSDOS computers have beeped when there was a full keyboard buffer for as long as I've ever used them. The beep has nothing to do with DirectInput. The keyboard buffer is not in the keyboard. It is the buffer in the OS where the keyboard commands are stored before being processed. Keyboard ghosting and masking are totally different issues related to the design of the keyboard.The Goat 20:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Then you must have been using different MS-DOS computers from what I was using. My computers have never beeped because of keyboard buffers. Maybe my link didn't explain what I wanted it to, but it's a fact that key jamming and n-key rollever both happen because of circuitry. --Kjoonlee 20:52, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, there used to be this utility for DJGPP which happened to show you which keys were being pressed. With my friend's keyboard it showed a quite limited number of simultaneous keypresses, but with one of my new keyboards it showed all the keypresses even when I was pushing down 30+ keys. That was under DOS. No beeps. Not even with my friend's keyboard. --Kjoonlee 20:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

BIOS usually beeps when the keyboard buffer is full. 144.126.208.195 09:24, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

First of all, mouse support was in Descent right from the beginning. Second, some of the top Descent players were using a keyboard/mouse combo. Third, key jams are due to the circuitry, but the beep was from the BIOS when the keyboard buffer (255 chars) was full. So there's a good chance that someone never hit that limit. You could hit it when desperately trying to evade hostile fire on a slow machine with heavy lag (happened to me often enough) with very fast key repeat. But well, the controllers section is gone for good, isn't it? Karx11erx (talk) 00:30, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

On hindsight I see I've been assuming more than I actually know to be true. Thanks for the corrections. BTW what you say about slow machines reminds me: homing missiles were more deadly for targets with fast computers. Omega cannons were more deadly if the attacker had fast computers. --Kjoonlee 11:41, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Running Descent on XP

I tried to load this game on windows xp, everytime i do it the screen bounces during game play, thinking xp is to fast for the game and the natural ship movement is increased which makes the whole screen jump up and down repetedly, just wondering if anyone else knows of this or has a way to fix it?

grtnrthrn —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.188.26.120 (talk) 03:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC).

You're highly recommended to try running it on DosBOX 0.70. It's a free software that simulates a DOS-like environment for running DOS games, which apparently cannot run well in XP. It's very simple to use as you only need to mount a virtual drive and run the game! Read the readme inside the download package for more details. I'm using it currently too to play Descent, and it works great. Chimaera ex 14:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Mac version music

Can anyone add info regarding the music on the Mac version of Descent? (i.e. The producers and possible names of tracks) RustyATV 05:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Uploading screenshots

Hello. I'm pretty new to uploading images on Wikipedia, but I really want to add some screenshots for Descent 1 / 2 (I'm a huge fan of it). Moreover, I think it can help to increase the reader's understanding of the game.

Could I simply capture a screenshot in the game and upload it on the page? Or would there be any violation of copyrights? Just needed to make sure.

I'd also appreciate if anyone could tell me the ideal image size (dimensions) for screenshots on the page. Thanks. Chimaera ex 14:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Descent.jpg

Image:Descent.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

'Premise'?

The article has the following text: "Descent's opening briefing made a reference to the "Humans First" strike (see the Premise section above) where the miners rebelled against the new robot technology. Other plot points include nanotechnology, an evil faceless corporation, and the virus they are attempting to harness. Descent 4 was planned as a prequel to Descent, and incorporated those elements."

I looked through the history and couldn't find any revision where they mentioned a 'Humans First' strike. I know that this piece of information has popped up various places...could someone explain where it's mentioned in the game itself? I had the PowerPC version, which was bundled with my computer and had no FMVs, so maybe I missed something. AustinZ 14:14, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure about where it is in the history, but the humans first strike is mentioned by the PTMC guy (the then unnamed Dravis) who says that Material Defender (the player) has used violence before. --Kjoonlee 14:29, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

It was definitely mentioned in the opening briefing of Descent 1. I don't think all of the versions had the exact same wording in the briefing, but in the PC version of Descent 1, the exact phrase is "We are aware from your record in putting down the 'Humans First' mining strike, that you can get difficult jobs done." Kyouryuu 03:54, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Category under vehicular combat

Would it be safe to classify the series under vehicular combat, as it does deal with flying in a ship? Earlier games did intend to focus more on destorying opposing CPU vehichles, with progression merely qued via the destruction of the core and escaping. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.77.232.145 (talk) 01:10, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

If such a genre exists, certainly. Descent is one of those games that is hard to classify because it's so "out there". -- Sirius-NZ (talk) 22:15, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Baseless deletion of on-topic external links

I'm fairly new to Wikipedia (albeit not Descent) so I hope this is the right way to approach this issue. I've noticed that the link I provided to "Moon's Descendarium - THE Single Player Guide to Descent 1-3" has been deleted by Ong elvin. Before we start into a to and fro of adding and deleting it I'd like to resolve this issue here. I've thorougly read the arcticles provided by him but from my understanding this link is in complete compliance with Wikipedia policy. It does not violate ANY of the rules nor the intentions of Wikipedia. So I don't see any reason to provide people with a link to further reading material on a topic of their interest. After all, links is what the internet is based on. AllElseFailed (talk) 09:29, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Long story short - Wikipedia is not a game guide. (WP:NOT#GUIDE) And your typical video game article does not link to game guides, except where they are pretty stable wikis themselves. Keep in mind also WP:ELNO #1. If this article were to become FA, it would not contain any of the material one would expect to find at this single player guide you link. WP:ELNO #10 also excludes fansites, clan pages, and the like from linking. I have stated the reasons repeatedly whenever removing such links. Links to sites of a similar nature as the Descendarium are inevitably removed at some point in an article's life. (Except, of course, to large, stable, and comprehensive wikis.) You can certainly argue that there's also a bunch of articles that have such links inserted, but realistically, they will never exist in a Feature Article. Ong elvin (talk) 05:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I left in the Bredel website because it's not a game guide. It actually discusses the history of the game, which is what you want in an ExtLink. The Official Site I left in, since Official Sites of the topic are allowed; similar case with the Source Code. The MobyGames links I left in because awhile ago there was a discussion at WP:CVG/GL regarding whether they should be used; which reminds me, I need to check on the status of that discussion. Now the Open Source projects, I honestly don't know my way around them. From what I gather, three of those links need to be removed, as they are Descent 2 projects, not the original Descent. I've left it to someone else to figure out for the time being, but if no-one else clarifies for me or does it themselves, I'll be doing it myself soon. Ong elvin (talk) 05:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Finally... I feel somewhat insulted that you called the deletions "baseless" when I mentioned it in the edit summary. If you wanted an elaboration, that's fine, but there is an edit summary - it's clearly not "baseless." Ong elvin (talk) 05:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC) EDIT: I say this in the nicest possible manner. I understand you want to be civil about this.

Hi, all the nice D2 projects should support D1 as well, AFAIK. (I'll define nice as "supporting D1." Hah.) --Kjoonlee 18:04, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Like I said at the beginning, being a newbie to editing Wikipedia I wasn't sure where to comment but I thought the discuss page would invite other people to comment on this issue since it turns out the way I was afraid it would: we both state our disagreement (what "you" want and what I want in an external link differs) and so we're still on square one. Though I agree with you on the Wikipedia is not a game guide rule I do see no harm whatsoever in linking to a variety (!) of external on-topic information. On the contrary, like any encyclopedic entry it should have a focus but also lots of references, footnotes if you will, that cover the entry's subject in a broader sense that readers may or may not follow up on.

I'd rather say that the MobyGames link is unjustified since it merely regurgitates info already given in this article which certainly would collide with some of the rules you're trying to uphold here. I also don't see your intial point of a link to a game guide wiki being allowed. Why does the content of the link suddenly become irrelevant and the form the info is presented in does matter? The Descentarium has been around since '95 or so and since there's only a finite number of secrets/tough spots in the games (all of which are covered) there's no point in making it a wiki to let people contribute, is there?

Finally, I wasn't trying to offend you by using the term "baseless". I simply reviewed the list of links normally to be avoided none of which apply to the site in question thus I consider your removal of the link a baseless/unjustified. AllElseFailed (talk) 07:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah... I see then. Well, it's actually a mix of WP:ELNO #1 with WP:NOT#GUIDE there, so not so obvious. I suppose I deserve it. xD Either way, there's also Important Points #1, WP:NOT#MIRROR, WP:NOT#DIRECTORY, WP:NOT#FAQ, and then something about "useful doesn't mean encyclopaedic" which I can't remember the location of. (Summary of the last point: A phone book is useful, but not encyclopaedic. Something to keep in mind when creating an ExtLinks section.) In short, a whole lot of points within two core policies of Wikipedia fighting against that link. And as I already mentioned, such a link will eventually anyway during the article's rise to Feature Article. Ong elvin (talk) 13:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Link to "Descent: FreeSpace - The Great War" at top of article leads to page on wiki with goatse image

Least I think that's what it was.

I was going to get rid of it myself, but it looks like they've messed with the layout somehow so it's nonstandard, and I didn't want to linger on the page any longer than I had to.

Can someone with a stronger stomach clean that up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.225.83.114 (talk) 00:27, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I had a look but couldn't find anything wrong about the FS page or its templates or images. Maybe someone else has already fixed it, or maybe there's a problem on your side. I don't know. --Kjoonlee 01:45, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Huh, I'm still getting the goatse page. I don't think it's on my end because I'm not getting any (other?) redirects and according to firefox's address bar it's still on the wikipedia.org domain. It's the only page that comes up like that. I'll run 'hijack this!' to be sure though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.225.83.114 (talk) 03:23, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Hrmm... searching freespace takes me to the right page now, but the links from the Descent article still give me the goatse one. I checked under IE and got the same results. Here's the url I get sent to when taking links to the freespace article from certain wiki pages (nsfw link broken, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Descent:_FreeSpace_%E2%80%94_The_Great_War) and this is the actual freespace page I get on a search http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freespace.

Looks fine for me too. You're probably getting stale content WP:BYC. Q <sup>T C</sup> 03:43, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I looked through the history of the FreeSpace article and its images and templates but coudln't find anything fishy. That's why I suggested something might be wrong on 114's end... --Kjoonlee 04:18, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm thinking Kjoon is right. I'm running through the security process to see what I can find. I'm still getting the same problem. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.225.83.114 (talk) 04:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Felt I should mention, I googled "got hagger?", a phrase that's visible up when I get the problem page (nsfw, link broken: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Descent:_FreeSpace_%E2%80%94_The_Great_War) underneath the term "Brought to you by Grawp" and I get the following website http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=18309, a thread talking about wiki issues using an old sockfarm the admins got to for an example (grawp, see case here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Grawp, was apparently one of the user names connected to it). Perhaps this is an artifact of that in some fashion? Have you tried using the url I posted instead of going to the actual freespace article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freespace)? I went to the bogus page and found the edit link, but it takes me to the edit page for the legit article near as I can tell.

Known template vandalism. Please don't de-link pages just because the target is broken. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 07:59, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Ooh.. Which template was it? --Kjoonlee 08:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

{{Cite video game}}. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Navbox?

Has anyone been thinking about designing a navbox to quickly jump through the Descent/FreeSpace series? I think it would be a good idea. StevePrutz (talk) 02:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Biased

This article is heavily biased towards "everyone loves this game once they get used to it", and there are many weasel-worded unsourcable statements such as "most people found the game fluid and very enjoyable". These elements violate neutral point of view. 69.105.172.180 (talk) 02:47, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Inaccurate, unsourcable

"The series has a strong following due to its unique six degrees of freedom (6DOF) gameplay. However, because this gameplay can be challenging and strongly favors the use of a joystick, Descent never gained the popularity of more conventional ground-based 3D first-person shooter games.[citation needed]"

I think this is completely untrue. I remember descent being hugely popular among pc gamers. Also, I don't think it was that insanely challenging. That's hard to source too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.118.49.33 (talk) 17:34, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Descent was popular enough to spawn two sequels and a loyal fan following, but it was unpopular compared to other first-person shooters at the time: Quake, Unreal, Doom, Duke Nukem 3D, etc. It is a statement of fact to say that the game had a steeper learning curve for most gamers than most other FPS's, but it is difficult to source anything much beyond that without delving into pure POV. Reception rules apply. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 01:01, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I generally agree with KieferSkunk if you look at popularity from a sales standpoint. However, Descent was very heavily OEMed, meaning it was bundled with computers, joysticks, soundcards, etc. I was told it was the second most heavily OEMed game ever (to its release). Many, many people played the game from the OEM version. As with Quake, Doom, Duke, it was available via a free demo, too. I wouldn't call it unpopular, though. I would say those games were more popular, probably even allowing for OEM versions, particularly Doom. Doom was a mania. [Mike Kulas, Parallax cofounder] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.116.35.251 (talk) 23:41, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

A note on availability, and a few more external links, perhaps?

Perhaps there should be a note that the game is available from GOG.com?

Also, the article contains a number of mentions of various projects descending from the released Descent source code. Wouldn't it be nice to mention the respective URLs as well?

The link level editor (DLE-XP) probably deserves an URL mentioned, too.

• http://www.descent2.de/
• http://www.descent2.de/dle-xp-intro.html

— Ivan Shmakov (talk) 21:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)