Talk:List of video game industry people

Sections
I sectionified the list to make it easier to peruse and edit. I suspect this list will get pretty lengthy soon, so it was easier to make these changes now while it is still manageable.

Also, changed the ( -- ) after the name to a colon. I just thought it looked better. You may change them back if you feel strongly about it, but consider using &mdash; (&&#0109;dash;) instead.

I also removed the companies the people work for or used to work for unless they had something to do with the company, such as founding or co-founding it. &mdash;Frecklefoot 17:47, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)


 * Disagree with this. Does not take up much space, and is useful information. Snowspinner 17:49, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure it should be for non-notables. I don't really want to see every single person who's ever coded a Java game getting on here, as that would make the list useless. Snowspinner 17:57, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I copied the list of musicians from video game music. Possibly, that article should be changed to feature only a list of the most notable ones. It might seem a bit weird to link to the less specific article that covers the whole industry instead of just music, but we should be prepared that this page might have to be split up in the future anyway. Fredrik 18:01, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * I think this is exactly backwards. A list specifically on video game music can afford to be more detailed than a list that's including video game musicians along with other creators. More general articles go into less detail, and hit only more substantive and important highlights. Snowspinner 18:03, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * That's why there should probably rather be a separate list of video game musicians. Lists of this size should preferrably not be part of any main article. Fredrik 18:09, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Done. I think major figures should still appear on this list, however. I just don't know which ones they are. Snowspinner 18:13, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Significant figures
I'm kind of reluctant to suggest this, but I think it'd make the list more useful. How about adding some sort of indicator for significant people? For example:


 * Peter Nobody : Designed '' Barbie Goes Shopping
 * Sid Meier : Civilization
 * Fred Obscure : Designed  Plop Boy   at home when in high school

or some such thing. Of course this may spark the whole debate that we had on video game, but I think it'd make the list easier to use: one could scroll through the list and one's eyes would be drawn to the significant figures. The obscure people could still be investigated, but the notable figures would stand out (as they should). Just a thought. Input? &mdash;Frecklefoot 18:14, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)


 * My fear in obscure people is that it becomes very hard to draw a line such that the article doesn't become uselessly unweildly. Yeah, it'll require hammering out consensus, but I really think that this should be a list of important figures. Obscure and minor creators can and should be noted on pages of the individual games they did. But I don't want the entire design crew of every game in existence to be on this list, because it would make the list useless. Snowspinner 18:18, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * If they are worthy of having their own articles, they're worthy of being on this list. Easy enough. Fredrik 18:22, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I thought we covered this. I thought we decided to create this list because we couldn't agree on who to include and who to exclude in the "Notable people" list in video game. I suggest we put that list back (I just now noticed that you removed it) and use this list to include everyone. Notables can be indicated in the fashion I suggested or in some other manner. I thought the whole point of this list was we wouldn't have to quibble about who can and can't go on it&mdash;if they worked on a video game, they can go on. Now all we'd have to quibble about is who is notable on this list. :-) &mdash;Frecklefoot 18:41, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)


 * I thought it was just because we were worried about the list getting too long and overwhelming the article. =) Unless we want a second article on major figures. But that seems like overkill as well. Though if this is going to be a list of general, I'll probably spin off List of major figures in the video game industry Snowspinner 18:42, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I prefer to put the concise list back in the article and list everyone in this list and just indicate notables in some manner. &mdash;Frecklefoot 18:47, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)


 * I'd prefer a link out of article. But I think articles are too often cluttered by excesses of lists.Snowspinner 19:05, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Well, I think the creation of the "notable" list was a bad idea, but since no one else objected, I guess no one else cared. I would've prefered to notate notable people in this uber-list, but some indication of notable people vs. obscure people is better than none. &mdash;Frecklefoot 15:00, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)

Title
Some pedantry about the title List of game industry people: It assumes game industry is video game industry; I do too, but would most readers/editors? Changing it would run into the video vs. computer game issue. By specifying "industry" it also could exclude significant people that normally wouldn't be considered part of the industry, such as Roy Trubshaw (one of the creators of the first MUD) and Willy Higinbotham. In the end, I'd suggest list of video game developers. Thoughts? --Mrwojo 21:42, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * I suspect there are very few non-video-game people that will have articles written about them, might as well throw them in here so the list is justifiably generic. Subdivision of pages of content should be by iterative deepening, driven by size/content; in other words, do a split, see how the article(s) develop, only then consider doing further splits. Nothing sadder than three-item lists that will never grow. Stan 05:07, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * I was suggesting that this page should be moved, not split. --Mrwojo 11:52, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * I understand, but the move you're proposing would have the effect of encouraging a (premature IMHO) split. Also, "industry" in this context is understood to be very generic - for instance, CS professors are often listed as being "computer industry figures", whether or not they worked as a consultant to a company. Stan 14:37, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * I agree that "game industry" could be mistaken for board and other non-video and computer games. But the intro to the article specifies that it is talking about video and computer games.  If someone wants to develop a list of non-video and -compter game people, we can deal with the issue then.


 * As for the naming List of video game industry people being a problem, often the term "video game" can be generalized to incorporate computer games. Though we do have seperate articles for video games and computer games, using the term "video game" for convenience shouldn't be ruled out.  Also, when I was a game developer, I often said I developed video games even though I only made computer games.


 * Lastly, we shouldn't use list of video game developers. The term "video game developer" is ambiguous.  If you look at the video game developer article, you'll see a huge list of developers: "developers" here meaning companies that produce video games.  Though the term can be used to refer to a person as well, it doesn't always.  The list in the video game developer article may/should be split out soon and the name would clash with the developer (company) list. &mdash;Frecklefoot 15:00, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)


 * I too am slightly in favor of using just "video games" for the articles that cover both video games and computer games (timelines, concepts appearing in both, this, etc). This should preferrably be discussed in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computer and Video Games, however. Fredrik 15:11, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * I was thinking that the list of video game developers would kill two birds with one stone if it contained both companies and people. --Mrwojo 21:12, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Fine thought, but if you look at the list on video game developer, you'll see it's already pretty extensive. Mixing people and companies together would, IMHO, just muddy the waters and make the list less useful. &mdash;Frecklefoot 13:46, Apr 22, 2004 (UTC)


 * I am not in favor of merging the computer game and video game articles. Sorry if I implied that.  I only meant that sometimes the term "video game" can be used to refer to both video and computer games.  I only meant we could use it for convenience for naming a list of game industry people. &mdash;Frecklefoot 19:00, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)


 * That's what I'm saying too: "video game" for articles about subjects that relate to both computer games and video games. Fredrik 19:07, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Name change
Persuant to one of the discussions at the Computer and video games WikiProject, does anyone object to moving this page to List of video game industry people. In short, video games encompass computer games and console games (which we used to call "video games"). "List of video game industry people", IMHO, is more concise and just as specific as "List of computer and video game industry people." Actually, it is even more appropriate since "video game" in the new title would encompass arcade games as well, while its meaning in the current version means console games. &mdash; Frecklefoot | Talk 15:51, 28 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Doesn't bother me. As we've discussed exhaustively on the other board, there is no single good summary word for what we do that stands up to cross-examination by someone who wants to point out its imperfections.  If we need to pick a convention, I'm good with this one. Coll7 18:11, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I'll move it. Consider it done. :-) &mdash; Frecklefoot | Talk 14:52, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

List of Programmers
Why do we have this list of game programmers on this page? We should just reference the list and leave it at that. With this list, it makes a third list that would have to be maintained and administered (there is an additional, short list, in game programmer). If no one objects, I'm going to remove it and just give the link to the list. &mdash; Frecklefoot | Talk 14:52, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Oops, I misspoke. We don't have a List of game programmers!  I was thinking of another list... Nevermind, move along, move along. &mdash; Frecklefoot | Talk 14:54, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Category:Video game people
In the course of participating in Wikiproject Categorization, I have come across articles for a number of video game people that have been hard to categorize. I realized that this category is missing what most other categories have which is a "people" category. I am creating this now and adding a number of the cats from ""Category:Video game development to this. I will keep video game development, as there are non-people articles related to video game development. Scarykitty 18:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Many duplicate entries
Since this is first and foremost a list of people, shouldn't each person really only appear once in the list, instead of once for each area that they've worked in? The categories were added to make it easier to find people by what they're known for, not to divide up their contributions into multiple entries. I would think the best plan is to just list each person in the category that they've done the most significant work in and just mention their other work in the description. Anyone have thoughts on this? -- Fyrefly (talk) 21:14, 15 November 2010 (UTC)


 * As you note, some people have contributed to many areas of game development. I think it's better to list them multiple times rather than try to determine in which area their "most significant" contribution is.  This article is actually many lists, not just one, so duplicate entries are permissible. &mdash; Fr&epsilon;ckl&epsilon;fσσt | Talk 14:07, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually no, this article is not many lists. It is a single list divided into categories, hence the article name "List of video game..." instead of "Lists of video game..." And I admit that my solution is not perfect, but there's just so much redundant info in this list. For example, take Kelton Flinn, who has two entries. The first, under 'Online Gaming':
 * "Kelton Flinn: designer of Air Warrior and many other pioneering online games, co-founder of Kesmai"
 * and the second, under 'Company Officers':
 * "Kelton Flinn: Co-founder of Kesmai"
 * Did that second entry add anything at all? I can barely see a reason for even having the Company Officers category, except to list people who have been very significant in the industry, but didn't fall into any other category (which seems unlikely, btw). But if the person is already in the list for what they've actually done, do we need to re-mention them in this category because they happen to be an officer too? That seems pointless. -- Fyrefly (talk) 15:58, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Okay, I see your point for examples such as the one you cite. We do need the "Company Officers" category, however, since there are many people who founded or headed companies, but didn't do any direct development work (e.g. Trip Hawkins). &mdash; Fr&epsilon;ckl&epsilon;fσσt | Talk 16:26, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I think I'm going to at least do a little trimming for cases like that one. I'll try not to do any objectionable edits. -- Fyrefly (talk) 16:57, 16 November 2010 (UTC)