This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Master of Magic article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Master of Magic" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
The criticisms section has some claims that are unsupported and aren't NPOV
If you could have a "critics such as Y claim" type of statements, it would ease the NPOV issue. i kan reed 20:03, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Who wrecked this articles quality? There were over 20 mistakes in both spelling and grammar in the opening section alone! Ive attempted to fix them but I dont have time to go over the whole article right now. Poor form guys. -- Havoc8844 22:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Am i the only one who thinks this is starting to read like a strategy guide? i kan reed
The statement that a wizard following the Mirrored Path (Life or Death) can find a book of the opposite color is not correct. A wizard with Life magic will be finding books of Life even in dungeons/temples/lairs populated by Death creatures and vice versa.
The retorts of Infernal/Divine Power can be found regardless of Life/Death alignment but their effect is identical. It is possible to find both retorts in a single game though their effect will not be cummulative.
"Most of them never advanced past the alpha version or were abandoned; however, one was completely finished albeit with substantial modifications of the game rules."
I went looking for Leylines and I could find links to it in many places but not a single one worked - even on foreign sites. The official site is very short on information and there is only one screenshot. There is so very little information about this game out there that I wonder if it is a hoax. 70.242.200.239 19:26, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
This article contradicts itself by saying that Stardock is currently developing a sequel (at the top) and no sequel is planned (at the bottom). Which is it? Last I heard, Atari (vis a vis Infogrammes, who got it from Hasbro, who bought Microprose) had sold the rights to all old Microprose stuff to Sid Meier. Anybody got anything here? I didn't see a citation, so...
I remember with the original boxed game that wizard fortresses were poorly defended and it was easy to take them over and win. Years later I downloaded a different version from their website that fixed this. Did anyone else have this same experience? Should this initial shortcoming be mentioned? Also, I'm surprised there's not more mention of the "hero" strategy where a single hero is built up to exceedingly powerful proportions and can basically walk from town to town leveling it. Any thoughts? Bbagot 08:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
The game has uncanny similarities to MTG. Has this been discussed by any reliable source?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 23:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I have a few specific concerns, so I'll highlight them here
If there appears to be a reasonable consensus/lack of discussion on the matter, I'll reduce the section to a simpler summary, which relies upon secondary sources. i kan reed 23:36, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
-I love the game, but I agree, especially regarding the sources. The manual was woefully inaccurate at the release of the game, and by v1.31 has even more inaccuracies. I think it could be described adequately in a couple of paragraphs if we cut out the game-guide material, i.e. "Master of Magic is an empire-building strategy game that is very similar to Civilization in it's gameplay. Players take on the role of a wizard with customizable abilities who can effect the game with a wide variety of spells. Many people claim there are many similarities between the magic system of Master of Magic and that of the collectible card game Magic: The Gathering." 69.155.215.8 07:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
I am going to undertake the task to rewrite this article into more of a Wiki-article describing Master of Magic to those who have never played it, and less of a "game-guide" as per some of the observations above. The aim is to:
It is likely that the structure of the article would be:
There will likely be no development section as sources are scarce for it, and I believe MoM's development was low-hype and rarely reported of. Of course, if any one knows sources chronicling such details - like the history of its development, how and why decisions were to implement the game as it was, and such - that would be of help to establish such a section.
Any help (sources, screenshots) is very welcome. Jappalang 05:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
This is still a B, and I reckon it's low-importance. This is currently nicer than a lot of B-Class articles, but there's still quite a bit of work to do before wandering down the road to GA. Here are some ideas for your idea-implicating pleasure:
Hope this helps, Una Laguna Talk 16:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Said issue of Game Informer has stated Stardock is making a remake/sequel of Master of Magic (as contributed by TheodoreLarson). However kryo of Stardock has clarified in their forums this is false. [1] (Link posted here instead of in the WP as it is a forum post.) So officially there is still no remake/sequel for Master of Magic. Jappalang 16:06, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
I did a quick research on the release date of Master of Magic, and I've come to the conclusion that this game has been officially released in late 1994. There is a preview of Master of Magic in the Computer Gaming World number 122 of September 1994 ( [2]) and a complete review in December ( [3]). I also found another proof in the Google archive of comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic ( [4]):
I called a couple of mail order software companies and they have a release date of mid October, which seems to follow the usual pattern of two or three weeks past the dates quoted by magazines that review the games.
So I think that the release date should be corrected since it seems that the year 1993 is completely wrong. -- 99.246.165.220 ( talk) 17:29, 19 February 2009 (UTC) Luca
That's not at all what the IGN review says. It merely lists it in the chronology of Simtext games, not in the greater context. That line should be rewritten, but I don't know enough about the game to rework that paragraph appropriately. 65.30.31.2 ( talk) 05:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
mentioning of the OS it was released for - rather basic info for an encyclopedia article -- 92.202.76.239 ( talk) 19:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Per WP:RS, WP:VG/S, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-07-28/Dispatches, rpg.net has nothing to demonstrate its reliability in the Wikipedia sense. It is simply "an independent web site about tabletop roleplaying games" [9] with no editorial policy nor heavy reliance by academic, scholarly, or media sources. Jappalang ( talk) 17:13, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
there is an significant (but maybe not notable according to wikipedia guidelines) unoffical patch available, created by an guy with the pseudonym kyrub. this patch was produced with binary disassembling and hex-editing and fixes critical (in the MOM community) well known bugs, like the raise dead spell, the vortex crash bug or the inverse effect of the fear spell, see readme in the mirror link: http://koti.mbnet.fi/ton_hur/files/mom/MoM_Unofficial_patch_140f_fixed.7z . Last version was 1.40f from this year and the development was described and supported at the now defunct dragonsword.com forum ... (webarchive has no backup or up-to-now not opened to the public). I would be interested if and how such an significant fix could be integrated into a wikipedia article fitting the policies. thx 141.52.232.84 ( talk) 12:14, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Jappalang, the wiki article on video game articles states that forums and fan sites should be avoided but may be included if determined by consensus to be valuable. One of the core principles of wikipedia states that any rule can be broken for very good reason. Given that the mentioned patch is extensive, of high quality and unique (only available 3rd party patch that deals with AI improvements and bugs), it is easy to present an argument that it is valuable and relevant information. Moreover, the forum it is hosted on is the only active MoM community in existence. I do not see you making reference to valuable information, only that you don't see any press coverage for it. Do you have any personal experience with the game to draw upon in order to be able to determine what's valuable information? I assume valuable should be defined as "of value to users who are interested in the article", which for the most part means people who have played MoM in the past or still play MoM. It's a reasonable assumption that knowledge of an active MoM community and an extensive patch (which fixes crippling bugs and improves an AI which is defunct in several locations) is valuable to them. Catnub ( talk) 22:04, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
To get back to the point, is the patch in question notable? Any sort of reliable sources about it could easily establish the relevance to this article. As far as I'm aware, it's a localized, internet-only phenomenon. i kan reed ( talk) 14:27, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
I added a link to Good Old Games at the end of the Legacy section and provided digital release information, namely that the game is distributed with and runs under DOSBox 0.73 (not the latest version, but the first one to fully support Master of Magic). I added GOG because that's where I buy all my legacy games, but if you know of other sources where the game can be purchased, please feel free to add them so my addendum doesn't look like a sales pitch! THatfield977 —Preceding undated comment added 21:43, 12 May 2011 (UTC).
"[...] plus races unique to the game like the insectoid Klackons."
How are they unique to the game, if they also get featured in Master of Orion? 77.64.129.103 ( talk)
It seems to me that Ultima (i.e. Ultima V from 1988, and even earlier IV) did have an underworld, as well as multiple characters of various races and speciality the hero could control. Therefore I'm not sure if this paragraph is correct, especially that these claims appear unsourced. There is a source later pointing to a review but it does not seem to make that claim. 76.10.128.192 ( talk) 14:00, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Master of Magic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://tgnforums.stardock.com/?aid=165429When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:22, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Master of Magic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:42, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
I could find no mention in the article about the goal of the game. How do you win? Do you have to destroy all opponents? Are there any other winning conditions (like in e.g. Master of Orion). This is something I would expect to find in the gameplay section. 2001:14BA:A07D:D100:1D16:1D94:13B0:EEF5 ( talk) 17:32, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
See Talk:Master_of_Magic_(2022_video_game)#Relationship_with_Magic:_The_Gathering. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:27, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Master of Magic article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Master of Magic" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The criticisms section has some claims that are unsupported and aren't NPOV
If you could have a "critics such as Y claim" type of statements, it would ease the NPOV issue. i kan reed 20:03, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Who wrecked this articles quality? There were over 20 mistakes in both spelling and grammar in the opening section alone! Ive attempted to fix them but I dont have time to go over the whole article right now. Poor form guys. -- Havoc8844 22:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Am i the only one who thinks this is starting to read like a strategy guide? i kan reed
The statement that a wizard following the Mirrored Path (Life or Death) can find a book of the opposite color is not correct. A wizard with Life magic will be finding books of Life even in dungeons/temples/lairs populated by Death creatures and vice versa.
The retorts of Infernal/Divine Power can be found regardless of Life/Death alignment but their effect is identical. It is possible to find both retorts in a single game though their effect will not be cummulative.
"Most of them never advanced past the alpha version or were abandoned; however, one was completely finished albeit with substantial modifications of the game rules."
I went looking for Leylines and I could find links to it in many places but not a single one worked - even on foreign sites. The official site is very short on information and there is only one screenshot. There is so very little information about this game out there that I wonder if it is a hoax. 70.242.200.239 19:26, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
This article contradicts itself by saying that Stardock is currently developing a sequel (at the top) and no sequel is planned (at the bottom). Which is it? Last I heard, Atari (vis a vis Infogrammes, who got it from Hasbro, who bought Microprose) had sold the rights to all old Microprose stuff to Sid Meier. Anybody got anything here? I didn't see a citation, so...
I remember with the original boxed game that wizard fortresses were poorly defended and it was easy to take them over and win. Years later I downloaded a different version from their website that fixed this. Did anyone else have this same experience? Should this initial shortcoming be mentioned? Also, I'm surprised there's not more mention of the "hero" strategy where a single hero is built up to exceedingly powerful proportions and can basically walk from town to town leveling it. Any thoughts? Bbagot 08:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
The game has uncanny similarities to MTG. Has this been discussed by any reliable source?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 23:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I have a few specific concerns, so I'll highlight them here
If there appears to be a reasonable consensus/lack of discussion on the matter, I'll reduce the section to a simpler summary, which relies upon secondary sources. i kan reed 23:36, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
-I love the game, but I agree, especially regarding the sources. The manual was woefully inaccurate at the release of the game, and by v1.31 has even more inaccuracies. I think it could be described adequately in a couple of paragraphs if we cut out the game-guide material, i.e. "Master of Magic is an empire-building strategy game that is very similar to Civilization in it's gameplay. Players take on the role of a wizard with customizable abilities who can effect the game with a wide variety of spells. Many people claim there are many similarities between the magic system of Master of Magic and that of the collectible card game Magic: The Gathering." 69.155.215.8 07:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
I am going to undertake the task to rewrite this article into more of a Wiki-article describing Master of Magic to those who have never played it, and less of a "game-guide" as per some of the observations above. The aim is to:
It is likely that the structure of the article would be:
There will likely be no development section as sources are scarce for it, and I believe MoM's development was low-hype and rarely reported of. Of course, if any one knows sources chronicling such details - like the history of its development, how and why decisions were to implement the game as it was, and such - that would be of help to establish such a section.
Any help (sources, screenshots) is very welcome. Jappalang 05:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
This is still a B, and I reckon it's low-importance. This is currently nicer than a lot of B-Class articles, but there's still quite a bit of work to do before wandering down the road to GA. Here are some ideas for your idea-implicating pleasure:
Hope this helps, Una Laguna Talk 16:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Said issue of Game Informer has stated Stardock is making a remake/sequel of Master of Magic (as contributed by TheodoreLarson). However kryo of Stardock has clarified in their forums this is false. [1] (Link posted here instead of in the WP as it is a forum post.) So officially there is still no remake/sequel for Master of Magic. Jappalang 16:06, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
I did a quick research on the release date of Master of Magic, and I've come to the conclusion that this game has been officially released in late 1994. There is a preview of Master of Magic in the Computer Gaming World number 122 of September 1994 ( [2]) and a complete review in December ( [3]). I also found another proof in the Google archive of comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic ( [4]):
I called a couple of mail order software companies and they have a release date of mid October, which seems to follow the usual pattern of two or three weeks past the dates quoted by magazines that review the games.
So I think that the release date should be corrected since it seems that the year 1993 is completely wrong. -- 99.246.165.220 ( talk) 17:29, 19 February 2009 (UTC) Luca
That's not at all what the IGN review says. It merely lists it in the chronology of Simtext games, not in the greater context. That line should be rewritten, but I don't know enough about the game to rework that paragraph appropriately. 65.30.31.2 ( talk) 05:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
mentioning of the OS it was released for - rather basic info for an encyclopedia article -- 92.202.76.239 ( talk) 19:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Per WP:RS, WP:VG/S, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-07-28/Dispatches, rpg.net has nothing to demonstrate its reliability in the Wikipedia sense. It is simply "an independent web site about tabletop roleplaying games" [9] with no editorial policy nor heavy reliance by academic, scholarly, or media sources. Jappalang ( talk) 17:13, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
there is an significant (but maybe not notable according to wikipedia guidelines) unoffical patch available, created by an guy with the pseudonym kyrub. this patch was produced with binary disassembling and hex-editing and fixes critical (in the MOM community) well known bugs, like the raise dead spell, the vortex crash bug or the inverse effect of the fear spell, see readme in the mirror link: http://koti.mbnet.fi/ton_hur/files/mom/MoM_Unofficial_patch_140f_fixed.7z . Last version was 1.40f from this year and the development was described and supported at the now defunct dragonsword.com forum ... (webarchive has no backup or up-to-now not opened to the public). I would be interested if and how such an significant fix could be integrated into a wikipedia article fitting the policies. thx 141.52.232.84 ( talk) 12:14, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Jappalang, the wiki article on video game articles states that forums and fan sites should be avoided but may be included if determined by consensus to be valuable. One of the core principles of wikipedia states that any rule can be broken for very good reason. Given that the mentioned patch is extensive, of high quality and unique (only available 3rd party patch that deals with AI improvements and bugs), it is easy to present an argument that it is valuable and relevant information. Moreover, the forum it is hosted on is the only active MoM community in existence. I do not see you making reference to valuable information, only that you don't see any press coverage for it. Do you have any personal experience with the game to draw upon in order to be able to determine what's valuable information? I assume valuable should be defined as "of value to users who are interested in the article", which for the most part means people who have played MoM in the past or still play MoM. It's a reasonable assumption that knowledge of an active MoM community and an extensive patch (which fixes crippling bugs and improves an AI which is defunct in several locations) is valuable to them. Catnub ( talk) 22:04, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
To get back to the point, is the patch in question notable? Any sort of reliable sources about it could easily establish the relevance to this article. As far as I'm aware, it's a localized, internet-only phenomenon. i kan reed ( talk) 14:27, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
I added a link to Good Old Games at the end of the Legacy section and provided digital release information, namely that the game is distributed with and runs under DOSBox 0.73 (not the latest version, but the first one to fully support Master of Magic). I added GOG because that's where I buy all my legacy games, but if you know of other sources where the game can be purchased, please feel free to add them so my addendum doesn't look like a sales pitch! THatfield977 —Preceding undated comment added 21:43, 12 May 2011 (UTC).
"[...] plus races unique to the game like the insectoid Klackons."
How are they unique to the game, if they also get featured in Master of Orion? 77.64.129.103 ( talk)
It seems to me that Ultima (i.e. Ultima V from 1988, and even earlier IV) did have an underworld, as well as multiple characters of various races and speciality the hero could control. Therefore I'm not sure if this paragraph is correct, especially that these claims appear unsourced. There is a source later pointing to a review but it does not seem to make that claim. 76.10.128.192 ( talk) 14:00, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Master of Magic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://tgnforums.stardock.com/?aid=165429When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:22, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Master of Magic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:42, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
I could find no mention in the article about the goal of the game. How do you win? Do you have to destroy all opponents? Are there any other winning conditions (like in e.g. Master of Orion). This is something I would expect to find in the gameplay section. 2001:14BA:A07D:D100:1D16:1D94:13B0:EEF5 ( talk) 17:32, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
See Talk:Master_of_Magic_(2022_video_game)#Relationship_with_Magic:_The_Gathering. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:27, 14 August 2023 (UTC)