Talk:List of Strategic Simulations games

Better as an alpha list?

Other lists like this one, such as list of Electronic Arts games, are arranged alphabetically. Would this list be better organized thus? That way we could use the compact table of contents (see list of Electronic Arts games) so readers could quickly find any particular game. If not, should we create an additional list, arranged alphabetically? — Frecklefoot | Talk 15:27, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I kind of like the chronological ordering, in that it does a nice job of showing the release of titles over time. This is particularly good for companies which produced many games over many years. You are correct that there is a precedent for alphabetical ordering, though. --Slordak 15:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Sortable better?

I started making the list into a sortable list, so that readers could sort games by year or alphabetically, whichever they preferred. I got through about 1984 and then realized, everyone might not like the new table. If not, go ahead and revert (or discuss if you'd rather). Without any discussion within the next few days, I'll go ahead and finish converting.

I also thought the list could be improved by adding a "genre" column (e.g. World War II simulation, sports simulation, etc.). But that'd come later, but it'd be another factor to sort by. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 19:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

What about Earth 2150 and Earth 2150: The Moon Project?

Unless I am mistaken, this list is missing some of their most popular titles. Earth 2150 and Earth 2150: The Moon Project. Also, I have noticed, that I have seen many of the titles in the list at Best Buy. So it might be useful to note that supplying video games to Best Buy is one of their more successful approaches to publicizing video games.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.204.19.34 (talk • contribs)

I think you're right about the two missing games. Be bold and add information when you see it missing. As far as placing product with Best Buy goes, they are a major software retailer and I don't think you can cite distributing titles to them as a successful approach unless you can find a verifiable reference that says so. But that would be more appropriate for main article anyways, and not this list. Besides, they were around long before Best Buy was a big deal, so they really can't be one of the main instruments of their success. But it all hinges on a verifiable reference, otherwise it's original research, a big no-no here on the 'pedia. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 01:53, 2 February 2009 (UTC)