Talk:Ace of Spades (video game)

Cleanup
This page needs a major cleanup. The controls are pretty much straight ripped from the AoS wiki, and the other parts aren't very good either. Maybe add some citations from rockpapershotgun? --92.242.174.195 (talk) 23:37, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I absolutely agree, hence the tag requesting the tone to be checked. I propose that the entire "controls" section is removed. It is very much at the level of WP:GAMEGUIDE at the moment, which I find most disagreeable. Yannis A. ✆&#124;☑ 23:28, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Few details seem to be missing about the latest beta - unable to change due to protection status, though from the looks of it the protection status was quite needed. The page does need a rearrange/rephrase, I agree.The game's own wiki: http://www.aceofspadeswiki.com/ has all the information needed, would just need a decent compilation. Once the protection is removed (or if people can be added to bypass it?) I could get the other staff from the official wiki together to do a rewrite. --Wiki-tGM (talk) 15:15, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Man..the style and grammar of this article SUCKS major ***. Definitely needs rewrite. - M0rphzone (talk) 05:35, 21 October 2011 (UTC

File:AceOfSpadesScreenshot.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion
game for 12 years and up

Added "modding and mapping" section.
Made a quick edit adding that small bit of info I felt was missing. If I missed anything or wrote the name of some program wrong, feel free to fix it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.96.181.30 (talk) 18:19, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid most of that is unencyclopaedic material. We do not include detailed info and trivia (especially game trivia). All additions have to be reliably sourced, this means secondary sources -- independent of the subject. While the fact that the game allows modding is notable, details of specific bits, software and individual modders rarely is. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 19:31, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Ok. IMO it is looking a bit tiny. Maybe add a new section, "features" or something like that, with the info that the game allows modding, the equipment the player has, etc? Another option would be to make it a sub-section instead of having it's own section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.41.83.210 (talk) 23:36, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

FPS?
based on the screenshots on the official page, this is not a first person shooter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.58.164 (talk) 09:20, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah it's a first person shooter — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.2.16.100 (talk) 02:40, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Build and Shoot
Are we going to mention that in the article? Lots of players are flooding there to download and play the old 0.75, they've got their own master server and everything — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.187.241.209 (talk) 20:26, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

It is mentioned late in the article, but only as a stub riddled with Citation Needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.217.44.57 (talk) 05:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Bias of the Article
While build and shoot is quite a big part of the games beta community, the last revision of the article to me appears heavily biased mentioning little about the current Jagex version and focusing on how great the 0.75 version is. The goes against the wiki's view on bias, which states this isn't allowed. Please keep all 0.75 stuff in the "Original Beta" section. I've since removed most of the bias, and I would appreciate it if those editing the article would adhere to this. Thanks! NottNott (talk) 17:33, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Trying to help but unsure what to do
I'm just a lowly anon, and concerning the dead link for citation reference #18, the link appears to be archived here: http://www.archive.today/X0oSK Not sure what to do in terms of implementing this in the article, hopefully a member can do that. Thanks 24.190.58.246 (talk) 22:45, 8 June 2014 (UTC)