Talk:Klik (Clickteam)

This article was nominated for deletion on 16 April 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

AMOS

Needs mention of AMOS (a page already exists)? Jamagic? I'll add it if I get a chance...

-- Jax

AMOS isn't really considered to be in the "Klik" line of software, but Jamagic is.

I don't think Jamagic is considered "klik" software since it's more of a scripting language, and since the interface is much different. -Rapidflash 00:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even though its not made by the same people shouldn't game maker be mentioned even as a competitor to multimedia fusion.

No. -- Boothman _/tɔːk/ 09:41, 11 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Advertising

Please guys, stop using this page to promote your games/website. If yours is noteworthy, someone else will add it. Radix 10:09, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

Lots of work still needs doing, like the whole thing being rewritten more concisely and the paragraphs being rearranged in logical order. -- Boothman 18:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've been meaning to do so for a while now. I will, like, later.Radix 16:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That Night Before

Why was it deleted? It won second place in the Daily click's GOTW #100 /Phredreeke

Hi Fred! 193.63.48.48 03:55, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External Links

I have deleted some links from the external links section. One of Wikipedia's policies defines how many links should there be for certain size of pages. We have enough. I deleted Hayo's site, because it is a personal portfolio, not a click site. I deleted NeatWares because frankly there are far better sites out there. I deleted Csar Games because there's no such thing as Csar Games, and also Starlord hasn't much content. I deleted Natomic because the site isn't around anymore.

Please please please will you not add any more links, unless they are of massive quality and popularity. I've added a link to Clickteam's page with all the links on there, so there's no real need for any more links. -- Boothman _/tɔːk/ 15:43, 19 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Too much links?

Noodle, You removed NW just because you hate me, reminding you that you doesn't own this website. It can be proven easily by the fact that you STILL left other unknown sites and sites who was note updated for a long time, While NW and Clickteam are friend sites (note the LoC ad on the user links page). Remove the unknown sites or add back NW.

Sign your additions with four tildes. If you have an issue with the Noodle, take it to his talk page. Too many people seem to want to use this page for advertising, and from the sounds of it you're one of them. If your group is notable, *someone else will add it*. Or would, but I've just removed that section. See below. Radix 12:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Groups list removed

I've removed the groups thing in favour of a generic 'external links' section because of the potential drama and the fact that Clickteam maintains their own list of developer websites (now linked from the article). Please refrain from adding group sites in the future, send them to CT instead and let them sort it out. If someone knows of a good page that has a listing of the better examples of klik software, that would be a fine addition since that's really what visitors would be looking at these pages to see anyway. I've added the GOTW page (ugh) for this reason, can't think of anything better. Radix 12:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gunner 3

Gunner 3 has its own article on Wikipedia, but I think it needs some serious cleaning up before adding it to this page. --XSheep 08:35, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm considering putting that article up for deletion due to its un-notability. -- Boothman _/tɔːk/ 10:41, 21 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I think that the game is worthy of an article here, but it would need to be completely rewritten from scratch. --XSheep 14:00, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd support that vfd, noodle. Gunner 3 isn't outstandingly popular, even within the community. I really don't think it meets the notability criteria.Radix 02:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the fact that Gunner 3 isn't really popular within the community, let alone main stream, like other games in the list. I don't think it should be listed, and until proven otherwise, I think it should stay off the list. Brandon Cassata (talk) 00:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MMO List

In addition to the well known games list, I added a small list of some known (even though perhaps not exactly well known) MMO's that were designed using any kind of klik programs. I personally think it's appropriate for the page, do I hear any objections?

I object to the 'massive' bit. CT software just cannot handle 'massive' online games. Which just makes them regular online games. Which makes them not really too much more special than regular games. So, yeah. I don't have a problem with some of those games, namely Flannville and SKS, but the others probably aren't popular enough to be worth the mention.

Also: Anything that is kept needs to be linked to, please add new comments to the bottom of the talk page in the future, and please sign your talk page additions with four tildes. Radix 11:22, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well someone decided to remove the entire list, however you're forgetting games such as SmileyHouse, which at the time of their release, were some of the most popular at the time. As far as the term 'massive' goes, yes, it is completely acceptable to use that term on some of the online games made in CT software, and this is because the software does not dictate if a game is massive, how many people it supports and how large and stable the server is, does. If you can support hundreds of people and still keep a relatively good ping going on for each one of them, then it can be considered an MMO. The only reason this hasn't been truely done in CT software before, is not because it isn't capable, but because no one can afford to just go out and buy and maintain a server like that, without getting some sort of donation or money from players. That alone kills any CT software MMO, because when you think CT software, you think freeware games, and when you dictate that, 90% of your entire audience completely loses interest. --BrandonC 15:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever. I've seen no evidence of 'massive' online games yet. Whether or not it's possible, you admit there aren't any, so why refer to them as such? Do not refer to games as MMOGs if they AREN'T. Radix 02:15, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Click-team-company-logo.gif

The image Image:Click-team-company-logo.gif is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:39, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Natomic

Can we link Natomic Studios to the Natomic Studios webpage instead of the site please? Andi553 (talk) 22:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Klick Acedemy

Klick academy doesn't exist anymore so i'm going to remove any mentioning of it. If I'm wrong you guys can easily change it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.142.238.82 (talk) 21:39, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]