Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of personal computer-only games

:{{la|List of personal computer-only games}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|List of personal computer-only games}})

I orginally tagged this page for prod with the following rationale:

"While I understand the reason for creating this list, it is very hard to properly define what a personal computer is. It probably includes games for Windows and MSDOS, but what about apple devices such as the Macintosh? The Commodore 64 or the HP 3000? What about Tablet personal computers and Pocket PCs? No matter which selection is chosen, the article will never be more then several of the existing Lists of video games thrown together and as I such I see no benefit in having this article"

I made an error in my rationale: the title clearly defines this list as PC-only games, which makes this list distinct from the existing Lists of video games, but this does not solve issue of scope. The creator contested my prod and adjusted the lead, defining this list as containing only games released on Windows, Linux or MSDOS. While definitely some of the best known operating systems it is a rather weird scope for this list article, unless it is renamed to List of games only released for Windows, Linux or MSDOS. I wouldn't have a problem with separate articles articles such as List of games only released for Windows, but the concept personal computer is simply too vague for this list to be useful in any way. Yoenit (talk) 00:49, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

• Comment - One problem with a singular naming scheme would be the intrinsic exclusion of computer-only titles that support two or more operating systems.   — C M B J   06:31, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
• At present the scope already excludes everything released for the Macintosh, for example Diablo, Unreal tournament and Civilization, all games of which are commonly known as "PC-only", so this problem is not unique to singular lists. Yoenit (talk) 11:07, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
• Note. The article was copy-pasted to List of personal computer-only modern games, so I CSDed it to move the page proper, but this AfD was opened before I could complete the move. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 08:03, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
• Sorry for interrupting you, but I don't see how the addition of a subjective term like "modern" would be an improvement. Yoenit (talk) 11:07, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
• Neither do I, I was fixing a copy-paste move. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 11:09, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 16:05, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 16:06, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

:It is the "IBM PC and compatibles" so also meant Macintosh with Intel processors, but no consoles and small devices where the games is incompatible. When we say Windows-only, someone comes along and says my phone is running on windows mobile too, but that was not meant! It's about the mainstream PC, nothing more. --IrrtNie (talk) 13:05, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. ({{find video game sources short|List of personal computer-only games|linksearch=}}) • Gene93k (talk) 00:09, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

• Delete I rarely say this about a list article, but this is a true example of an arbitrary standard. There would be a point in a list of games that run on a particular system--it fills a reasonable information need; there would be a point in a list of games ported to personal computers in the broad sense from arcade games, since it's a reasonable browsing topic; I can even justify a list of games ported to the mac from a previous existence on DOS/Windows, or vice versa, or possibly s list of games that run only on particular system but not on an alternative (though it would best be done as a two-column or multi-column table), but a list of games that run only on a particular set of systems but nothing else at all including everything possible a game could be, seems to no purpose & I can think of no reasonable need for it. And if the combination here is MS-DOS/Windows/Linux, there's no rational basis for lumping those three together. DGG ( talk ) 23:31, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

:I have changed the description. The operating system is not important, we are looking for PC games that are not exported to other systems. That's all. Games, with PC hardware priority that never downgrade to other hardware systems and the mass market. --IrrtNie (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:46, 25 August 2011 (UTC).

• Delete very vague as to be WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Try again on an OS-by-OS basis maybe. Dzlife (talk) 13:49, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.