2016-03-22 (updated 2021-03-29)
dandyboh has mentioned this platform before.

The original Matra Alice was a straight TRS-80 clonebased on the TRS-80 MC-10 and developed in cooperation with Tandy
The followup computers
Matra Alice 32
and
Matra Alice 90
Were also based on the original Alice but contained custom chips (mainly the video processor) meaning many Alice 32/90 games will not run on Tandy computers. Also, they use SCART and French TV signals, so again, not on Tandy.

Alice 32
CPU: Motorola 6803
8k RAM
8k video RAM
EF9345 video chip
16k ROM
AZERTY keyboard
built-in assembler (like Apple ][)
RS-232C serial interface
Cassette interface
Péritel video out
Expansion slot

Alice 90
32k RAM
CPU: Motorola 6803
8k RAM
8k video RAM
EF9345 video chip
8k ROM (Microsoft BASIC)
full sized AZERTY keyboard
RS-232C
Cassette
Péritel video out
video in (graphics could be overlayed onto video)
Expansion slot

They were apparently popular in French schools.

MC-10 and Alice hardware are not related to Tandy Color Computer (Coco) nor TRS-80 Mofel 1/3/4.

2021-03-29
ok, I think I have almost everything sorted out.
MC-10 is not Coco nor TRS-80, It is a unique architecture not z80, 6800, nor 6809. The included BASIC has some compatibility between TRS-80 and Coco but with issues.
Mantra Alice was based on the MC-10
Alice 32 was based on Mantra Alice. The differences broke compatibility.
Alice 90 was based on the Mantra Alice and Alice 32 and restored compatibility (It runs software made for any Alice system)
The MC-10 was deeply flawed, sold extremely poorly, and was discontinued quickly. In contrast, the Alice series is known (in France)

I think we have enough info to add an Alice Mantra Series to the platforms. With a warning on the platform page that the interwebs had a lot of bad information about this series.

2021-03-29
That's what I mean, TRS-80 software does not run on Alice*. TRS-80 is a z80 based system. Alice is 6803 based. Or did you mean TRS-80 MC-10? Yes, I would expect MC-10 and Alice to share some compatibility on a hardware level.

*Except BASIC. But there are issues with this between different Tandy machines sharing versions of the same BASIC and I expect Alice would have the same issues and maybe more

2021-02-25 (updated 2021-03-29)
The more I learn about the Alice 32, Alice 90, and TRS-80 MC-10 the more I think it should be a platform separate from TRS-80 and Tandy Coco. They all use the 6803 CPU which is not Z80 nor 6800, like the TRS-80. 6803 and 6809 are in the same CPU family. But the Alice 90 is called a Tandy Coco clone. I somehow doubt the a 6803 machine would run 6809 software. Information available on line is contradictory. I simply don't know enough to know how to group these.

2021-03-29
With a warning on the platform page that the interwebs had a lot of bad information about this series.

I am fine with adding that as platform. It should be clearly stated which machines the platform is for and that its for games that are specifically for that group of machines. If the Alice is sort of compatible with the TRS-80 and a TRS-80 game "also" runs on an Alice computer, but is not an Alice specific version it should only be a TRS-80 game entry.

2013-05-12
How to mark these?

For example:
* Postal 2 has Running With Scissors office building in it.
* Some Command & Conquer game had Westwood Studios office in it.
* Alice Soft games seem to have their mascot Alice in (some of) their games.

These are related to author avatar, but they're very different from that.

2014-07-02
Not only David Cage, but also creators of Ubi Soft (Guillermot brothers) or Eric Chahi. Famous games like Another World, Flashback, Heart of Darkness, Alone in the Dark, Little Big Adventure, Rayman, Amerzone, Syberia, Dune, Dragon Lore, Lost Eden, Beyond Good & Evil, Hogs of War, Heavy Rain or The Nomad Soul were made by French video game creators, mainly from Ubi Soft, Infogrames, Cryo or Microïds studios.

I remember, when I had my first computer, Amstrad CPC, that many games I owned were made in France. We also had lots of computers that were mainly sold in France, like Exelvision, Thomson MO5 / TO7 (schools were equipped with these computers, as Thomson had a special agreement with the French government), Oric (originally British, but later bought by a French company), Matra Alice (Tandy CoCo).

French government was very interested in these technologies and made a huge plan to educate children to computer science and use of computers (I remember I learned Logo and used a light pen at school when I was something like 7 or 8 years old).

2007-06-12
For me the site looks pretty much the same with Safari on Windows (version: 3.0 - 522.11.3)...

Few screencaps to illustrate:
Safari: [[link:http://koti.mbnet.fi/ultima/uvl_safari.jpg front page]], [[link:http://koti.mbnet.fi/ultima/uvl_safari2.jpg alice game entry]]
Firefox: [[link:http://koti.mbnet.fi/ultima/uvl_firefox.jpg front page]], [[link:http://koti.mbnet.fi/ultima/uvl_firefox2.jpg alice game entry]]

2012-09-22
It would be, but the fake company would still be a company, no matter how many it "employs". We can see this already happening with Hikware and Team Shanghai Alice (and yes, both are just single person).

2008-07-02
Yeah, were-prefix has that flaw. Anthro~ on the other hand doesn't really mean exactly the same thing as what people call "funny animals" like Bugs Bunny, but refers to animals (and objects) with human traits in general. Says nothing about being cartoony or anything, but that unfortunately seems to be the common interpretation of it as it is probably the most common use for it, too (though many things in say Alice in Wonderland, Wizard of Oz and Narnia do fall under anthropomorphic, this fact seems to be missed by most people). Like the Ents and Huorns in LotR are anthropomorphic trees :)

2009-08-13 (updated 2021-03-29)
Lots of different architectures were made by Tandy.
[list]
  • Tandy 1000 & 2000 were PC clones with 8080, 8088, 8086, 80186, 80286, or 80386 CPUs. More accurately, it was a PCjr clone and while it was 100% compatible with the PCjr it lacked the cartridge port and full compatibility with other IBM-PCs. Most developers, if they bothered with Tandy 1000 compatibility, would make a selectable mode for their program to run on it. In particular, these programs often asked the user to select "Tandy Sound" and "Tandy Graphics.". Some actually fully ported their software and sold the packages separately or (rarely) included both disks in the box. Robot Odyssey: Special Edition was ported to the Tandy 1000 and sold separately. They Tandy 1000 and King Quest game (Developed for the PCjr) helped make each other successful. It was an unheard of game until the Tandy 1000 was released and then IBM abandoned the PCjr leaving no other way to play the original King's Quest. Despite later IBM clones having the ability to play it, only the Tandy 1000 would allow the full 16 color graphics to display properly. UVL does not have a Tandy 1000 platform.
  • Tandy GRID were PC clones
  • Tandy TRS-80 had a Z80 CPU. There were Model I, Model III, Model 4, Gate Array 4D, Model 4P, Model 4D in this series. Not compatible with the 1000. UVL has a TRS-80 platform. Robot Odyssey: Special Edition unrelated and not compatible in any way whatsoever and should not go in this platform (but there might have been a TRS-80 version, not ruling out the possibility) UPDATE: IF there is a TRS-80 version (note that is a big "if"), then it is specific to the Model 4 or 4D. The only reason this would exist is due to the 1984 presence of so many TRS-80s in schools and probably used the "Robot Odyssey I: Problem Solving Game" title variant like the Commodore 64 version.
  • Tandy Color Computer (Tandy CoCo). UVL has a Tandy Coco platform. Had a 6809 CPU, it was not compatible with the TRS-80 or 1000 models. However, the company confusingly called it the "Tandy TRS-80 Color Computer". Others avoid calling it this because it is so confusing. They dropped the "TRS-80" from the label of the CoCo 2, 3, and 4 models. Robot Odyssey: Special Edition unrelated and not compatible in any way whatsoever and should not go in this platform (but there might have been a TRS-80 version, not ruling out the possibility)
  • Tandy Zoomer. A hand held IBM-PC clone with an NEC V20 CPU (Intel 8088 clone). It beat the Apple Newton to market as the first fully functional PDA, it also beat the newton for worst hand writing recognition, slowest performance, and worst market flop. UVL does not have a Tandy Zoomer platform.. UVL now has have a Tandy Zoomer platform
  • Tandyvision/Tandyvision One Computer. Tandy sold authorized clones of the Intellivision plus keyboards and cassette decks for it. They marketed it as a Entertainment Computer System. They however did not make or repackage games for it. Sears made the Sears Super Video Arcade, another authorized clone, but also made and repackages games under their own brand. By the time Mattel Aquarius was released, Tandy was no longer selling the Tandyvision but their Tandyvision One computer (keyboard and drive added) was fully software Aquarius compatible. UVL has a Both the Intellivision and Aquarius platforms and Tandyvision games should go there.
  • Tandy-12. A series of augmented reality games. They could be classified as board games. Simular to Stop Theif, there was an electronic computer with 12 multicolored, numbered, lighted buttons (an oversized keypad of sorts, it also served as a display) and 5 normal buttons and a switch. This unit was programmable and was pared with traditional game elements of each game.

    Some external hardware was interchangeable between the different Tandy computers. Such as keyboards, mice, and joysticks. There may be other Tandy machines out there. I expect most of them are clones of something else. Tandy corporation most likely investigated cloning all their competitors platforms, including Sinclare, Commodore, and Apple ][, They may have done an MSX compatible as well.

    The Dragon 32, Dragon 64, Micro-SEP, Micro Color Computer (6503 CPU), MC-10 (6503 CPU), Tomcat TC-9, Tomcat TC-70 (68070 CPU), Delmar System IV (6800 CPU), Peripheral Technology PT68K-4 (6800 CPU), MM/1 (68070 CPU), AT306 (68306 CPU), and Sysdata Tcolor (6503 CPU) computers were vaguely Coco clones. They are so different I don't think they should be considered the same platform.

    Coco Clones with unknown compatibility:
    The Sampo Color Computer
    Prologica CP400 Color
    Varixx VC50
    LZ Color64
    Dynacom MX1600
    Codimex CD6809
    Microdigital TKS800

    EDIT: Tandy did do an Apple ][ clone. It was an add in card for the Tandy 1000 that converted the T1k to an Apple ][ machine.

    EDIT2: Nobody cloned Commodore except Commodore. The whole idea behind cloning is to assemble and sell 'the same system' cheaper that the original manufacture does (or the same price and offer other profitable services the original company does not or can't). Nobody could compete this way with Commodore due the vertical marketing (owning most of the process from mining silicon, shipping it, designing chips, manufacturing chips, designing the computers, building the computers, and finally shipping them to stores). When prices rose in any step of the process, commodore absorbed it in the other steps and didn't raise their shelf prices. Other companies had no choices except lose money or pass on the extra cost to their customers. I'll wager highly that there are no Tandy 64s. The 'Commodore Clones' are hobbyist upgrades or produced by companies that had legal rights to do so (1st party clones, Commodore clones by Commodore).

    Update:
    Other Tandys that are not TRS-80 I/III/4 compatible:
    TRS-80 Model II (Just plain different)
    TRS-80 MC-10 (The Matra Alice was based on this system. EDIT: MC-10, Alice, Alice 32, and Alice 90 are in the same family and not software compatible with Coco, nor TRS-80 Model 1/3/4, not any other Tandy machines)
    TRS-80 Model 100 (a Kyotronic 85 clone)
    TRS-80 Model 12 (later incarnation of the Model II)
    TRS-80 Model 16 series (later incarnations of the Model 12)
    Tandy 10 (a unique Intel 8080 based computer)
    Tandy 200 (later incarnations of the Model 100)
    Tandy 6000 (later incarnation of the Model 16)
    Tandy Pocket Computer series (Casio Calculator clones)
    TRS-80 Pocket Computer 1 / RS-80 Pocket Computer PC-1 (Sharp PC-1211 clone)

  • 2016-10-31 (updated 2021-12-20)
    I do not think splitting _normal_ GNU/Linux distros is a good idea. Perhaps steps should be taken to specifically prevent Linux Distro spitting by editors. Ubuntu, SteamOS, Redhat, Debian, Fedora, Sabanyon, Slackware, Slax, Puppy, Suse, Mandrake Mandriva, ALT Linux Sisyphus, Arch, Caldera, CentOS, Corel LinuxOS, Familiar Project, Gentoo Linux, Knoppix, Lindows, Pardus, PCLinuxOS, Trsiquel, PLD Linux, VLOS Linux, and any other disros can co-exits nicely in this platform. I also think all architectures of Linux distros can co-exits here. Linux-centric and GNU-centric alternative kernels (Hurd, L4) can also go here as they are drop-in replacement kernels (Much like PTS-DOS, DR-DOS, Novell DOS, Caldera DOS, 86-DOS, 4DOS, can be used as drop-in replacements for MS-DOS and there games all fit in the DOS platform)
    [SPLIT]
    Editors: What to do about specialized distros for platforms we already have? DS Linux, WiiLi, Gamecube Linux, Palm Treo Linux, PSP Linux. As I've stated before, I think, these belong in their existing platforms with distro tags. DS Linux games in the Nintendo DS platform, WiiLi in the Wii platform, etc...

    EDIT: Note that any game written 'the only correct way' :) can be compiled for a specialist Linux just as if it were for Windows, Mac, Amiga, Android, or some other 'normal' platform. Provided that all it's dependencies can be all.

    Clearly UNIX operating systems of the "Single UNIX Specification" that hold no other distinction can share a single Platform (separate from BSDs and Linuxum)
    AIX, SCO UNIX, AT&T UNIX, UNIX (generic), Bell Labs UNIX, Tru64, HP-UX, and another other SUSs that show themselves.
    [DONEish]
    Solaris, while being UNIX is distinguished by certain hardwares and use by certain revolutionary French game developers. SunOS 5.0+ is Solaris (tag Solaris even if it is for SunOS 5.0)
    [DONEish]

    The original UNIX replacement.
    BSD (generic), OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, BSDi4, SunOS (versions 1.0 to 4.1.4), and any others.

    FreeBSD[15.384615384615385%] I found a complete list of current FreeBSD games with release dates and licenses. I'm entering it whilst checking it against many incomplete lists.

    BSD I've only found extremely partial lists so far.

    BSDi4 no lists found.

    NetBSD I've only found extremely partial lists do far.

    OpenBSD I've only found extremely partial lists do far.

    SunOS no lists found.
    [DONEish]


    IRIX is UNIX and BSD mixed. It is also and SGI MIPS specific.

    RISC OS. Ten games entered currently, but there's many more out there. EDIT 3: Discussion needed.

    Minix. It's neither Linux nor UNIX. A Unique operating system unto itself. [DONE]

    NeXTstep is complicated.
    NeXTstep, OpenStep, GnuStep, and Rhapsody share many aspects. However, it should be noted that NeXT split OpenStep development and end-user software from the various NeXTstep hardwares (separated head from body, so to speak) to create a cross-platform operating system (or more accurately a platform agnostic operating system or even cross-kernel operating system). Sort of Java like (Java came later, from many of the same people). Still, Many games and tools run on both. OpenStep became Rhapsody (it can be thought of as OpenStep version 5). Rhapsody eventually became Mac OS X Server 1.0. However, I don't think anything Mac should share the NeXTstep platform. If it did, then OpenStep would too. That's a problem because OpenStep runs on Solaris, NeXT, iOS, HP PA-RISC, Mac (old, classic, and new), and Windows NT. GnuStep has an even wider range including Linux.
    GnuStep is based on publicly available code and APIs from OpenStep
    Cocoa is a descendant of OpenStep
    There are various sources that say "OpenStep is not compatible with NextStep in either direction". Yet, the same executable for many games and software will run on both and some even on Rhapsody. That said, "block box" games (NeXTstep on NeXT hardware) must be recompiled to add OpenStep compatibility. OpenStep games can be compile from the get go for OpenStep and "black box". GnuStep games generally compile without code modification on Rhapsody.
    NeXTStep is by NeXT Inc.
    NextStep is the licensed version (IBM NextStep for example).
    NeXTSTEP is Sun's version
    OPENSTEP is Apple's version.
    SHORT: NeXTstep, OpenStep, GnuStep, and Rhapsody, same platform, NeXTstep. Each tagged specifically for platform and kernel and architecture compatibility)
    [DONE for now]

    Pandora. It's a Linux, but very hardware specific.

    NASCOM home computer kits ("NASCOM"). Not sure of the variants, but people have reported Frankenstein all sorts of parts among the various models (parts noted by NASCOM for _only_ model such) to add compatibility of other models without sacrificing compatibility of the original model. Sounds completely interchangeable to me, thus, only a single NASCOM platform needed. I lean towards adding now
    [DONE]

    HP 3000/e3000 series. A very, very long lived platform. 35 years! Thus a high potential for many more games than the 29 entered.

    Apple ///. I actually expect about 99 games exist for this. Entirely different animal from Apple ][.

    Apple I. I don't think add at this time. I suspect that Apple I games are 100% compatible with Apple ][, so just tag in Apple ][. calling the platform "Apple ][ series" has been mentioned before by me (and solves //c, ][e, ][enhanced, ][plus, and all the variants).

    These platforms have fewer than 10 games each and I don't expect more than 12 to be discovered ever.
    AtheOS / Syllable OS 
    SkyOS
    QNX/Q-nix
    OpenVMS/VMS
    GECOS/GCOS  (1 game, Space Travel)
    TX-0 (3 games period, however it's still running therefore new games are not impossible. The games are very impressive for 1959) New Platform: TX-0 https://archive.org/details/MainFram1984
    Data General Eclipse  (1 game, Colossal cave)
    NIMROD platform (1 game, NIMROD)


    PDP-11

    AROS. Amiga 3.1 alternative; thus doesn't really work in the Amiga platform.

    MorphOS/Quark. Amiga compatible. Leave it in Amiga? Note there are games with Amiga and MorphOS versions so It's kinda prone to split.

    PDP-7
    PDP-10
    PDP-11-45

    GE-600.

    Honeywell 6000

    I'll leave Windows Phone/Mobile to a later thread

    I'll leave all other mobile platforms to a later thread

    Timex Sinclair TS 1000 & TS 1500.

    Novell NetWare

    Data General Nova minicomputer

    HP 1000 and 2000 and HP 1000 minicomputer series. I'll clean this mess anyhow, but a single platform for this series seems best. I don't recall HP 2645 at the moment, I'll get back to this later. EDIT: I've looked into the HP 1000/2000 situation and IT IS A MONSTER OF A MESS to sort out. For one thing, they are not all named 1xxx and 2xxx. But the good news is, there seems to be one common platform there that is not HP 3000 nor HP 9000. HP 4000, 6000, 7000, 8000 are IBM-compatibles, HP 5000 is gameless (Lord willing). Also, this series was introduced in 1969 and continued to have units manufactured until 1990 (in the form of clones)! The clones were produced in Poland and Czechoslovakia where they still are still producing new Atari 8-bit games so why not new games for HP 1000? EDIT 2: Actually, HP manufactured new units as late as 1992.

    Scientific Data Systems Sigma 7

    Matra Alice compatible. Discussed in forum

    Ohio Scientific, Ohio Scientific Challenger II, and Ohio Scientific Challenger I+ An all-in-one Ohio Scientific platform seem sufficient to me.

    Colleco ADAM Discussed [DONE]

    Timex Sinclair 2068

    Tandy mess discussed and in forum

    Xerox Parc Alto microcomputer [DONEish]

    Heath H-89

    Amstrad PCW I say we add now [DONE]
    Memotech MTX I say we add now [DONE]
    Tatung Einstein. I say we add now [DONE]
    Camputers Lynx. I say we add now [DONE]
    Ouya Platform. I say we add now [DONE]
    Exidy Sorcerer. I say we add now [DONE]

    2007-11-29
    [[quote:Sometimes a game 'references' another but is not similar, a spin-off, a sequel, or the like. It may be a minor reference that doesn't come near to the level of 'influence'. For instance, Zelda 3 & 4 have a couple of enemies from SMB 3. Zelda 4 also has Kirby as an enemy. What does the community think of a 'references->referenced by' relationship for these very minor influences?]]
    A lot of games reference some older [adventure] games, so it might be fun to add, but some references are bound to be left as in-comments-only because they're not games. Like Alice in Wonderland references :) Same actually goes to influences from outside the gaming industry. But yea, I have nothing against adding another relation type.

    2014-10-17 (updated 2014-11-06)
    "Alice" was a 3D perspective chess game with a unique scoring system. Moves, checks, and captures scored points in addition to the traditional checkmate. It is possible to obtain an extremely high score and lose the match. A perfect score was 999, required no mistakes or sacrifices, and required promoting all pawns to queens. It was widely played and developed by staff at Apple Computer, Inc. including Steve Capps (main developer), Steve Wozniak, Joanna Hoffman, and Trip Hawkins.



    Steve Capps also retained (and still retains) complete ownership of the game and wanted his former co-worker, Trip Hawkins, to publish it (Trip Hawkins and other founders had just recently started Electronic Arts). Steve Jobs convinced Capps that Apple could do a better job marketing the game than some no-name start-up game publisher.

    It was ported to the Macintosh (in two days) and geared up to be a pack-in game at the launch of the original Mac. In fact, it was a feature of many of the Mac ads. But "Alice" was taken by some other software that Apple hoped would be used on Macs, so the Mac version was named "Through the Looking Glass" (The Lisa version apparently kept the original name). A last minute marketing decision canceled the game's launch. Apple management wanted Mac to be seen as a serious business machine, not a cheap game playing machine (they managed that already when they downgraded the Mac to a monochrome display and upped the price from $1,995 to $2,495). Both the Mac and Lisa versions were quietly directly sold to any customer who happened to call Apple and asked about it.

    The game's development played a part in the 'family quarrels' provoked by Steve Jobs. Jobs tried to get Steve Capps to quit the Lisa team and join the Mac team. Without Steve Capps, the Lisa would probably not have had any way to use a printer from many months after launch. Steve Capps would only join the Mac team after finishing the printer work *and* a after the launch of the Lisa.

    In 2009 Capps released the game as AliceX for iOS and also a JavaScript version on his website.

    As the game was a direct sale item. It probably came on a Twiggy floppy at first then 3.5" 400k disk later.


    EDIT: Another Lisa game! ChipWits (not Twiggy)

    EDIT: Yet another Lisa game! Beyond Zork: The Coconut of Quendor
    This may indicate many zilengine Infocom games were supported for Apple Lisa. But so far I can only confirm this one for "Lisa™2 (512k)" as sated on the 3.5 disk label (so it is not Twiggy as was the standard floppy format on the original Lisa)

    2008-04-11
    I guess its a question of 'realness' within the fiction supported by minimal suspension of disbelief. I don't think Mickey Mouse is actually counts as a mouse, he interacts with his world as if he were human and the other characters in that world treat him likewise. As opposed to Bambi who is still a deer, despite being able to be heard by the audience in their own language and reacting with human like emotions and having a few other behavioral abnormalities for a deer (such as monogamy). The mouse in the movie Mouse Hunt is a mouse. The rats in Secret of Nimh <i>would</i> be a tough call, the normal rats and mice they interact with would be considered animals (with some suspension of disbelief), but the rats themselves state "We can no longer live as rats", claiming non-animal status for themselves and willingness to risk their entire existence to backup this claim. I would agree that they are no longer animals simple because of their claim and successful defense of it. Another tough call is the toys in the movie Toy Story. Again the deciding factor for me would be what the Toys decide about themselves. They claim not to be alive and are only capable of feeling alive when they are being played with. However, some of the toys attempt to claim autonomy. Buzz believes himself to be an actual living space ranger. This claim turns out to be a delusion and Buzz accepts his existence as a toy. Despite being capable of movement and apparently able to make decisions, he is still an objectprotagonist (or whatever term was decided on for animate objects). Woody attempts to choose the path of his life as if he is a freewilled living individual by agreeing to the prospector's plan to be 'immortalized' in a museum. Whether this plan will work or is just another vain delusion turns out to be a mute point; in the end he agrees he is Andy's toy and denies any claims to the contrary. The prospector has no delusions about being a toy and is quite angry about it. He's decided to be a toy on his own terms and only accept owners from behind safety glass and security systems, rather than fulfilling the traditional toy role of being played with. He selfishly wants joy without having to give any in return. Being able carry out this plan might have actually proven his status and an autonomous being. But in the end, he is forced to be a toy against his will. To sum up, they are all toys because they are unwilling or unable to act otherwise, and this isn't necessarily a bad thing. Number 5 in the move Short Circut claims to be a living being in a most pointed way. He understands death and wants to avoid his own. He understands death well enough to realize the hypocrisy of killing other living beings to save his own life. In fact, he sees the death of any living being as equal to his own. This is not morality, as he has no idea between right and wrong (though he learns the difference later in life); he didn't even understand death until after he had killed a living creature. He has no qualms with destruction of non-living objects, including his four non-living 'brothers' and an identical non-living duplicate of himself that he constructed. He is able to successfully defend his life, and claim personhood, and eventually able to achieve legal recognition of both in the world in which he lives. One last question; are there animal antagonists in Alice in Wonderland? Alice is definitely the protagonist, but ultimately she is also the antagonist, since all the antagonists are from her own mind. But does this count?

    So it is still a question of 'realness' within the fiction supported by suspension of disbelief and by the characters willingness and ability to successfully defend their own beliefs about their nature. Its simple, we need to ask the protagonists, "Who are you? Explain yourself."

    2008-02-18
    Been thinking of adding more types, but I can't think of nice names for them.

    First one is, generally speaking, the unique, different from the rest, or special-kind of protagonists. They have something others don't (usually not <i>just</i> some item), they're somehow different/special from the rest, or they're unique. These are common in especially fantasy games, but some others have them as well. There's probably more interest in non-special protagonists, but those can be found with tag negation.

    The protagonist of Ultima series probably fits this type. Not sure if Link from Zelda series would also.

    Also for the one-of-a-kind protagonists, like Raziel in Soul Reaver.

    In case of X-Men, this wouldn't really apply since pretty much everyone else around you have special powers as well. I'm not sure Abe was any different from the others of his kind either, but I never played those games. "Elites" shouldn't fall to this either, as in, people who're just "better" than the rest without anything tangible setting them apart aside raw skill unless that was somehow highlighted as being unnatural, one in a billion kind or some such.

    And then there's things like (Lewis Carroll's) Alice. A fringe case where this tag could work as much as not, as all the games are in her imaginary world. Of course, we could consider her "special" for simply the fact that she can get succumbed into these weird fantastic worlds inside her own head (and she's quite often declared insane [which she is AFAIK], so that's another point for being different from the rest).

    ---

    In related note, I'd like to add some military/soldier protagonist type as well that catches any and all military personnel (officers, commanders, regular troopers, and all) but I'm not sure what to call those.

    This would be for games like Call of Duty, Ghost Recon, Rainbow 6, etc.

    Also for Black Ops folks. And probably air force folks as well.

    ---

    And there would be perhaps nice to have some generic tag for "professional" protagonists, the kind where you control a character who's been trained and whose job is exactly what you're doing in the game. Just that "professional protagonist" sounds silly.

    Although the most common instances are probably the same as for the military protagonist, this would also catch many more instances as it is more generic.

    There's those doctor games for one, fire rescues, police detectives, etc.

    2009-10-18 (updated 2013-05-25)
    Looking for simple and concise tag names for these.

    9, 24, 28, 30, and 34 still need something.
    4 needs improvements.

    1) Final retaliation - creatures that somehow still can kill the player after or on the moment of their death, related/sub types of this are suicide bombers and the poorly named splitting creatures. This includes things like exploding, releasing deadly vapors, potentially falling on the player character (especially in case of giants), releasing swarms of parasites or whatever inhabiting their bodies, and so forth. Regardless if this is intentional or not.
    ... examples: Dark Alliance (zombies), any instance of sucide bombers, Xenomorphs (acid blood, some games have them trashing about on the floor for a while which can also wound if you get too close), "glory devices", etc.
    = karmiccreatures

    2) Instant killers - regardless of lack of instant death and how ridiculously large amount of hit points the player character has, there are still things that can instantly kill them, possibly even ignoring any invulnerability and such. Being eaten whole is one common example, or failing a QTE.
    ... examples: McGee's Alice
    = instantkillers

    3) Meeting old characters, their graves, ghosts, etc. This was mentioned in the old thread but nothing was invented for it.
    ... examples: Nethack
    = past characters

    4) Self-resurrecting creatures (enemies) - unlike spawning new ones, the old ones return to life unless something is done to them (if anything can). Usually undead. May repeat indefinitely or only few times.
    ... examples: Zombi, Blood (only the zombies), Resident Evil 3 (nemesis)
    = Immortals (temporary?)

    5) Single player controlling multiple characters separately, especially when they're far away from each other.
    ... examples: Space Hulk, Zombi, Head over Heels, and some other games tagged with cooperation.
    = separatedprotagonists

    6) Separated or split up, the protagonist gets separated from the rest either intentionally or by accident. Including games where player controls more than one character and must go about alone with one.
    ... examples: Summoner, Jericho, Legendary
    = separated

    7) Games that ignore effects of moving uphill and downhill or similar. In contrast to games with stamina where this would have changes to stamina drain rate, while others would have effect on movement speed only (slower uphill, faster downhill). The ones that ignore the effects of such should be a minority.
    ... examples: Alien Carnage
    = zerogroundlevelgravity

    8) Simulated movement. Related to stamina, but the movement otherwise tries to be more realistic.
    ... examples: Silent Hill (maybe?), ArmA 2
    = life-like motion

    9) Group games where the player has no (constant) direct control over his followers. May still have the possibility to give some instructions to them (e.g. tactics, give verbal commands, or similar [instructions, in effect]) or switch which character they directly control. Primarily for real-time games, though also applicable to turn-based games (where the player needs to have less control for it to differ from regular group)
    ... examples: Star Ocean 3, Mass Effect, Last Remnant (maybe?)
    = group-leader, ??? (still able to control others directly needs another)

    10) "Active" group consists only of subset of total followers.
    ... examples: Star Ocean 3, Septerra Core, KotOR 1&2, Mass Effect
    = group-subset

    11) Mixed high and low tech setting. Swords and guns in same setting with the sword wielders pretty much equally matched with the gunfighters.
    ... examples: Star Wars, Star Ocean, and plenty of Japanese SciFi games.
    = mixedtech

    12) Characters are limited to "zones". In old games that functioned on "screens" this was somewhat natural for them, this was followed by games that had small zones that did not conform to a screen. Then there appeared games that didn't have zones, but the characters would still not wander outside their personal zones. This also became a method of cheating since you could back out of the character's zone of operation and shoot/attack it from outside it. This is occasionally done to fight the virtual stupidity, or simply to avoid writing too complex AI.
    ... RE3 was somewhat exceptional for those playing on consoles exclusively since that was one of the few well known games where a character was NOT confined to a zone. The now deprecated offscreen action partially covered games that broke from this zoning as well.
    ... examples: Star Ocean 3, Resident Evil games and any other games that have small "room"-like areas from which the characters can't escape unless the plot demands it.
    = zonednpcs

    13) Any game where you can run about on foot, control vehicles (land, air and space) and possibly ride animals. Multi-vehicular tag covers cases where you mostly move with vehicles and often swap with them, but otherwise it's unusable. There's really no way to differentiate between games where you run about on foot or drive a vehicle exclusively currently either. Even something so simple as side-scrolling platformer says nothing if you're on foot or on Moonbuggy.
    ... examples: Crysis, Far Cry, Fuel of War, Battlefield, Battlefront, ArmA 2, Grand Theft Auto, Parkan etc. mix on-foot and vehicular activities
    = walking, driving, riding, swimming, flying, underwater diving, ...

    14) Characters, vehicles etc. getting pieces of them cut off with damage. Especially with holes appearing in them when shot or otherwise penetrated. This is partially covered by dismemberment and damage modeling. Usuallly this is over dramatic damage modeling on biological entities. Sort of like voxel bodies though I doubt they're done with voxels, just slightly more advanced version of the tech used for dismemberment (doesn't only cut things in half).
    ... examples: several older lightgun zombie shooters mimicked this in a way, Left 4 Dead 2, Wolverine: Origins (for wolverine himself at least)
    = softbodies (temporary)

    15) Games where death forces the player to load a save or some such and games where this just sends them back to some respawn point (sometimes with a penalty, like xp, gold or some such loss). Permadeath and retrypoints tags cover only certain cases of these. Lives does not really say anything about it either. Some (especially those with lives) allow continuing right from where you died.
    = instantretry, retrypoints, retrypoints-rollback, deathpenalty, ...

    16) Ability to move environmental objects. Should be two tags, one limited to small objects and the other into both small and large. Possibly third for presence of strangely unmovable fixtures. Possibly counter with something that says there are no movable environmental objects.
    ... examples: Deus Ex, Prototype, Hulk
    17) Environmental object manipulation. Again, may need splitting to small and large. Pretty much same as moving, but the objects have other uses besides changing their location. Possibly merge with #16.
    ... preferably something that also covers telekinesis.
    ... examples: Half-Life 2, Penumbra, Twin Sector
    = mutablescenery-small, mutablescenery-large, mutablescenery-fixtures, inertscenery

    18) Falling on top of characters harms them. Head jumping tag is for method of _jumping_ (mainly from same height) on top them to damage them rather than jumping down on them from somewhere higher. This would be primarily for games where you can't jump on top of them when standing right next to them. Also implies dropping objects on top of them causes harm, somewhat overlaps with #17 due to this (throwing the object at their face likely has same or similar effect).
    ... examples: Assault on Dark Athena (outright kills the characters), several other games knocks the characters on the floor or slightly hurts them
    = bodyslamming

    19) Bullets and such that leave from some arbitrary point from the sprite or model instead of from the weapon that fired them. Similarly first person games where the gun is positioned unnaturally at the middle of the screen and cases where they aren't but the bullets still are projected from the middle. Shmups should be ignored as this is practically the standard behaviour for them that seemingly never got any attention.
    ...examples: Doom, Doom 2, many topdown shooters (projectiles leave from the center of the sprite/model instead of the gun)
    = centerprojection

    20) NPC/minion shopping. NPCs and possibly even the player character's minions can buy items and such for themselves when they feel like they need them.
    ... examples: Majesty 2 (minions buy armor, potions and magical artefacts when they feel like they need them and when they have enough cash for them)
    = npcshopping

    21) Player owns or can own a large houshold with a number of (presumably loyal) retainers and they must manage this to some degree or simply benefit from their existence.
    ... examples: Baldur's Gate 2(?), Summoner 2, Divinity 2
    = estate

    22) Creatures or characters that normally instantly would attack the player, but do not. Friendly monsters, so to speak, though not necessarily friendly (could be neutral/indifferent) nor monstrous by appearance.
    ... examples: Grim Fandango (all the skeletal dead), Dark Alliance (ghosts), Divinity 2 (most ghosts), Fallout series (non-feral ghouls)
    = neutralmonsters

    23) Group members can die, but as long as even one stays alive, the others can be resurrected.
    ... examples: most older games tagged with group. Mordor series did a twist for this that your whole party may die, and be resurrected by another group strolling about.
    = resuscitation

    24) Same as #23, but characters fall unconscious or become incapacitated instead, and come around after combat (usually barely so). They may remain unconscious until healed even after combat.
    ... examples: More recent games tagged with group. Those marked with multiple protagonists. Some games allow both falling unconscious and dying, though usually enemies do not try to beat up unconscious party members if there are better targets around.
    = ???

    25) Being spotted causes NPCs to gain a magical ability to know where you are. Especially troublesome in certain stealth games. Also, another contrasting tag for NPCs not gaining such ability. They'll continue shooting where they _think_ you are, but you could already be somewhere far off, or behind their back.
    ... examples: two first Splinter Cell games are reported to as having the first, while the following games the latter.
    = relentless guards

    26) Forgetful enemies. After chasing you for a small distance and not seeing you for few seconds, they'll forget that you ever were there and return to their posts or whatever. Especially when this happens inside a high security compound. There's no general alert issued until you've been found nor do they inform others of a sneaky bastard on their premises.
    = forgetfulenemies

    27) Player has the ability to instantly kill or incapacitate NPCs.
    = killingblow, stunning

    28) Improbably healthy NPCs, and improbably healthy player character. Common in non-tactical shooters. Characters survive much greater beating than anyone could believe them capable of. Commonly does not extend to vehicles.
    = ???

    29) Skill/ability/"research" tree. A tree of new abilities which is unlocked either by adv-ptdistr or upgradesystem.
    = abilitydependencies

    30) Dropped items are completely destroyed instead of appearing in the game world. Usually accompanied by a warning that the item(s) will be destroyed by the action.
    ... examples: many console RPGs.
    = ???

    31) Items in the world that can be placed in your inventory can be destroyed while they're in the world. This should not include trash functionality of your inventory. Implies itemdurability. (not including "plot items")
    ... examples: many roguelikes
    = destructible items

    32) Items can't be dropped. (not including "plot items")
    ... examples: many adventure games.
    = inventory-indisposable

    33) Items you have in the safety of your inventory can be destroyed by external means. (not including "plot items")
    ... examples: some roguelikes
    = inventory-unprotected

    34) Player encounters dangers they must evade. Or even flee in terror.
    ... examples: these are often QTE's
    = ???

    I'll edit this post directly to add new ones and mark those that have proper tags.

    2010-03-07
    You are right. the church tag is hopelessly inaccurate. churchbulding cathedral or chapel should be used instead or have no churchbuilding tag. But temple should not apply to church buildings (or mosques). Plus churchbulding could ambiguously imply 'building churchs' (like citybuilding)

    "Templa also became associated with the dwelling places of a god or gods. This tradition dates back to prehistoric times." - Wikipedia

    "Though the word "temple" is used broadly, one should use it with discretion in the context of some religions. A mosque for example, should never be called a temple." - Wikipedia [emphasis mine]

    "In Judaism, the ancient Hebrew texts refer not to temples, [...] Each of the two ancient 'temples' in Jerusalem were called Beit Hamikdash, which translates as "the Holy House" - Wikipedia. Also the tent tabernacle that preceded the stone tabernacle was not a temple. More recent tradition uses the word "temple" to refer to buildings for Jewish worship. This however is against orthodoxy and controversial even amongst non-orthodox practitioners of Judaism.

    The Jewish tabernacles served as a place of sacrifice for the atonement of people's sins. People suspected the spirit of God chose to dwell there, but were not certain. This was likely because they were influenced by the surrounding non-hebrew religions, taught for certain their temples & idols had gods residing in them. The Bible does not provide a fully clear answer on the question of residence in the Beit Hamikdash. God did not reside were the tent was taken, rather the tent was taken to where God chose to reside (Deut 12:5). Regardless if He resided in the Beit Hamikdash or not is secondary, residence was not the purpose of the structure. The first commanded structure was actually a tent and had to meet very exacting design standards spoken by God to Moses. The second, non-commanded (but allowed by God) structure was designed by people (based mostly on the original design) in part to impress non-Hebrews. No one consulted God about the third, which was a replacement for the second. Only one at a time was allowed. God appointed only one Beit Hamikdash to reflect the fact that there is only one true God (Deut 12 & 16).

    Christian belief is quite clear about where God dwells (its not in buildings). "Do you not know that your body is the temple (the very sanctuary) of the Holy Spirit Who lives within you" - 1 Corinthians 6:19a



    >> In some cases, not even people are allowed in particular areas or the entire structure.
    Same applies to churches. Though complete restriction is unlikely on any modern temple, not sure about older churches, but i'm pretty sure there has been those that were reserved only for the initiated.
    >> When people are restrictive about who's allowed to enter a building, they are treating it as a temple rather than a church.
    Churches can be as restrictive.

    Christian churches can't, or they cease to be Christian; its that simple.
    Many buildings have doors with "employees only" on them. Temples are or have restricted areas for religious reasons. While churches may restrict an area out of practical concerns ("pastor's office") there is no scriptural support for doing so for religious reasons. If there is a 'church' that no one is allowed into, then its a temple. There is no 'initiated' that are allowed more privileges in Christianity. They must follow the example of Jesus who made no restrictions on who he hung out with. There is a set of guidelines spoken by Jesus for how to win over, correct, forgive, and only when absolutely necessary, discipline followers with 'the silent treatment' (but not visitors). Some denominations have used this to justify kicking people out of church (the guidelines do not allow kicking out). There was no 'initiated' status Jesus spoke of nor command to restrict anyone from anywhere. There is no support for restricting or removing visitors or members from a church. Over the years some people calling themselves a church have instituted dress codes to restrict or remove people. Again, there is no support for this. They are just wrong. Churches are not allowed to restrict because of a way a person's dressed, who they are, their race, male or female, age, their hairstyle, tattoos & piercings, family associations, rich or poor, nationality, profession, or 'just a certain kind of people.' This was instituted by Jesus of Nazareth long before civil rights laws. Do you realize its perfectly legal in many places to force a prostitute to leave a property but Jesus specifically forbids a church from doing the same (despite their legal right to do so)?
    Note there is some common sense involved. If someone is really is disruptive enough, actually dangerous, they can or should be asked to leave or even forced too (even the police called); nearly the same as if their behavior would prompt like treatment in a place of business or on a public bus for example. However, following the example of Jesus, the church is called to be much, much more tolerant that civil law allows. As an example, a Lutheran pastor, for over a year, tolerated a drunk long haired scary looking freak to drink whiskey in the sanctuary and even heckle him during Sunday service every week. Of course the church members insisted the the pastor call the police, he had every right to have him arrested and charges pressed. But the pastor could find no scriptural grounds to turn away this weekly visitor, who so far had not been an actual danger to anyone, nor did he want to kick him out. One day the drunk heckler decided to speak to the pastor up close and personal. The church had not restricted him from coming for all that time and he got sober turned his life around soon after that conversation. Had he went to a 'church' that turned him away or had him arrested, he would still be a lost alcoholic. That guy is Vincent Furnier, now a 'born again Christian', most people know him as Alice Cooper.

    The only real difference I know of churches and temples in general is that churches can be reserved for private celebrations (for a price), such as weddings, funerals, and whatever it was they do with newborns.

    That's an extremely narrow view. I've attended church in school buildings, barns, movie theaters, private homes, bars, the fireman's hall, tents, garages, city hall, in a recreational vehicle, in a parking lot, in a public park, in a blocked off street (by city permit), in a redwood grove, at an amphitheater, in sports stadiums, on a lake, in a pool, and in a warehouse. In the past, it was common to have church in catacombs, grave yards, and sewers. This still happens in some places in the world. Church is held in coffee shops, furnitures stores, wineries & breweries, hotels, even at strip clubs & brothels (not during regular business hours). At one church, volunteered as the late Saturday early Sunday clean up crew at a rented city building where parties were held. The goal was to get it ready for Sunday service. In addition to general party mess, there were alcohol spills, and occasionally, used condoms, sex toys, and even passed out people (city workers, strippers, prostitutes, and their customers, who always got a friendly invitation of course; one of them is a Sunday school teacher now). There's even churches that meet in former temples.

    The Coptic/Eastern Orthodox churches split off from the Catholic church long before the Protestants did. The reformation (that resulted in the protestant denominations) prompted some reform in the Catholic church as well (which was actually the goal of "the reformers". it was never meant to created new denominations) but not in the Eastern Orthodox churches that were already out of the scope of the Catholic church and its Protestant offshoots. The Eastern Orthodox church is doing things that the catholics decided were wrong because the reformers pointed them out. This puts them at odds with catholics and those at odds with catholics. The Catholic church restricted the Bible before the reformation but the Eastern church didn't need to, there just weren't many copies available and too many languages to cover. They share basic core beliefs with each other but represent a vast gap in traditions. They've never had a "Hey, lets look at the Bible to see if we are actually doing things right" moment. Their policy of rejecting sola scriptura means they pretty much name things based on whatever sounds good to people at the time as opposed to naming things based on the way they are referred to in scripture. Therefore, they apply the word "Temple" to a church building and "Church" to its people, even though scripture clearly states that the people are the temple. This contradiction is not a problem for them because they simple tell members that the church interprets scripture, not members (ie: the sky is not blue because we say so and since no one looks at the sky, not even us, you'll just have to accept it.) Shortly, they do not use on the same criteria as other Christians, thus should be looked to to define it for all of them. Just as you can't define Buddhism as humorless becasue the middle eastern branches teach it that way, or say Buddhism values humor because the orient branches do.

    Bottom line: church tag is hopelessly inaccurate.

    EDIT: church mosque synagogue tags need to be banned or defined separately. Mosque and synagogue still work as locations