Skip to main content
Game Development

Return to Question

Moved proposed criteria into an answer.
Source Link
Maxpm
Maxpm
  • 101
  • 3

I recently asked, are there any premade outdoor worlds suitable for testing 3D graphics? The question was put on hold:

Questions asking for resources are considered too broad here, unfortunately (because they are list-of-link generators); a good place to ask if the suggestions above aren't sufficient would be GDNet.

I agree that I'm basically asking for a list of links. I don't agree that that's a fundamentally non-worthwhile thing for this site, though it might be prone to difficulties.

ThereIn other words, there are two nuances to my question that I think make the difference:

  1. The information isn't readily available elsewhere. It's not, for example, like asking "what are some free 3D game engines?" which can be readily answered by the first page of Google.
  2. It's not subjective, because it doesn't ask for the "best" resource, but rather any resource that reasonably fits the goal. The hope was for that broad frame to inspire answers catering to different tradeoffs. For example, "this scene's complexity is representative of contemporary games," or "this scene looks dramatically different under HDR," or whatever.

Given these criteriabad (unproductive) list-of-link questions and good (productive, or criteria like themhelpful, could exceptions be carved out ofwell suited to the broad rule against asking for resources?community's interest and expertise) list-of-link questions.

The only prior discussion I can find on this is a Meta question from 2010: Should we allow "list of X"-questions? The consensus back then was that such questions were allowed but needed to be Community Wikis, which sounds reasonable to me.

I recently asked, are there any premade outdoor worlds suitable for testing 3D graphics? The question was put on hold:

Questions asking for resources are considered too broad here, unfortunately (because they are list-of-link generators); a good place to ask if the suggestions above aren't sufficient would be GDNet.

I agree that I'm basically asking for a list of links. I don't agree that that's a fundamentally non-worthwhile thing for this site, though it might be prone to difficulties.

There are two nuances to my question that I think make the difference:

  1. The information isn't readily available elsewhere. It's not, for example, like asking "what are some free 3D game engines?" which can be readily answered by the first page of Google.
  2. It's not subjective, because it doesn't ask for the "best" resource, but rather any resource that reasonably fits the goal. The hope was for that broad frame to inspire answers catering to different tradeoffs. For example, "this scene's complexity is representative of contemporary games," or "this scene looks dramatically different under HDR," or whatever.

Given these criteria, or criteria like them, could exceptions be carved out of the broad rule against asking for resources?

The only prior discussion I can find on this is a Meta question from 2010: Should we allow "list of X"-questions? The consensus back then was that such questions were allowed but needed to be Community Wikis, which sounds reasonable to me.

I recently asked, are there any premade outdoor worlds suitable for testing 3D graphics? The question was put on hold:

Questions asking for resources are considered too broad here, unfortunately (because they are list-of-link generators); a good place to ask if the suggestions above aren't sufficient would be GDNet.

I agree that I'm basically asking for a list of links. I don't agree that that's a fundamentally non-worthwhile thing for this site, though it might be prone to difficulties.

In other words, there are bad (unproductive) list-of-link questions and good (productive, helpful, well suited to the community's interest and expertise) list-of-link questions.

The only prior discussion I can find on this is a Meta question from 2010: Should we allow "list of X"-questions? The consensus back then was that such questions were allowed but needed to be Community Wikis, which sounds reasonable to me.

Source Link
Maxpm
Maxpm
  • 101
  • 3

Can certain "list-of-link generator" questions be allowed?

I recently asked, are there any premade outdoor worlds suitable for testing 3D graphics? The question was put on hold:

Questions asking for resources are considered too broad here, unfortunately (because they are list-of-link generators); a good place to ask if the suggestions above aren't sufficient would be GDNet.

I agree that I'm basically asking for a list of links. I don't agree that that's a fundamentally non-worthwhile thing for this site, though it might be prone to difficulties.

There are two nuances to my question that I think make the difference:

  1. The information isn't readily available elsewhere. It's not, for example, like asking "what are some free 3D game engines?" which can be readily answered by the first page of Google.
  2. It's not subjective, because it doesn't ask for the "best" resource, but rather any resource that reasonably fits the goal. The hope was for that broad frame to inspire answers catering to different tradeoffs. For example, "this scene's complexity is representative of contemporary games," or "this scene looks dramatically different under HDR," or whatever.

Given these criteria, or criteria like them, could exceptions be carved out of the broad rule against asking for resources?

The only prior discussion I can find on this is a Meta question from 2010: Should we allow "list of X"-questions? The consensus back then was that such questions were allowed but needed to be Community Wikis, which sounds reasonable to me.