Template:Did you know nominations/Ace (video game)


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by  Jolly  Ω   Janner  04:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Ace (video game)

 * ... that the success of the low budget ACE (1985) flight simulator allowed its developer Cascade Games to enter triple-A game development?
 * ALT1 ... that several journalists regarded the low budget ACE (1985) as one of the best flight simulator of the time?
 * Comment: The game is stylized as ACE -- unsure if hook should use Ace (MOS:TM) or ACE?
 * Comment: The game is stylized as ACE -- unsure if hook should use Ace (MOS:TM) or ACE?

Created by Hellknowz (talk). Self-nominated at 16:08, 30 January 2016 (UTC).



, I'd like to make sure I'm not doing any OR on hook citing here, since the main source is online. Do you think it would be OR/SYNTH here to equal "producing AAA games" and "entering AAA development"? It's kind of like saying that someone started to sell milk and then saying that they entered the milk industry. It's not the exact wording, but it's by large synonymous. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 13:54, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Crash says "Flight simulator fans were treated to ACE by CASCADE, a company whose reputation was founded in the budget compilation market, and which moved towards mainstream games publishing with a very neat airborne combat simulation."
 * Retro Games (not available online) is more vague on this. I cited it mainly for statements like "Cascade diversified into bigger and more complex projects" and it calls Ace "triple-A title".
 * I do not have the magazine but it would be best to notify . Donnie Park (talk) 17:49, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Who and how do I notify? The main source's scan is online, quoted above. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 18:27, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Apologies, I didn't know I was asking you to notify you. I think I will call for a second opinion as I am going to have to retract the AGF pass. Donnie Park (talk) 00:47, 14 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Second opinion requested on review and OR/SYNTH question. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:30, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Carefully reviewing what Donnie Park and Hellknowz have stated and quoted, I do have to concur with Donnie that there may be a WP:SYNTH issue at hand here. To me, the main issue is not so much equalling "producing AAA games" and "entering AAA development". I think that's synonymous enough. However, the suggestion that Ace's success directly allowed Cascade to move into AAA development is not so directly stated in the Crash source. Crash mainly states that Ace is their first mainstream game, but doesn't denote anything about success. Can you be more precise about what Retro Games says about that, Hellknowz?  —♦♦ AMBER  (ЯʘCK)  11:58, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It doesn't say that directly. I don't think I can source it from anywhere else either. (The sources simply don't reflect back on companies after initial release and if they do mention them, it's generally as if everyone already knows it. So while the statement is true, I can't directly source it.) Which is aggravating, since that's the only redeemable feature of the game. Do you reckon it worth having an alternate hook to something like "reviewers regarded Ace as one of the best available flight simulators of the time." That at least I can directly source to several magazines calling it one of the best flight sims. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 12:43, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I do understand your frustration, but I'm glad you also understand the way Wikipedia (sometimes rather unfortunately) works. So yes, the new hook you just proposed could probably be approved, although I would like to suggest to make the subject of that sentence more precise than just "reviewers". —♦♦ AMBER  (ЯʘCK)  14:36, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I appreciate you taking the time to address this. Since "reviewers" is so common in video game topics, what would you suggest as alternative? I'll put "journalists", which is less precise, but more recognizable. I'll also say "several" to describe 5 in this case. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 14:48, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Approving ALT1. This looks good now. —♦♦ AMBER  (ЯʘCK)  22:06, 26 February 2016 (UTC)