6

After Dori pointed me at a proposal for Advanced Squad Leader I took a closer look at area51.stackexchange.com

There are many proposals for sites based on games that I think can be (or already are) covered here just fine.

I opened a question to encourage folks to stop by and help us build a great site for all games. Please consider stopping by to assist. If you are an expert on any of the proposed games, it would be awesome if you could weigh in on those proposals as well.

2

Yes, definitely -- also consider the reverse: which games are so huge they could deserve their own site? (Not many, but it's a useful thought experiment..)

3
  • Starcraft 2 comes to mind, but it doesn't have its own site (see gaming). I don't believe that there are any board or card games that deserve their own site apart from this one, but that's just my opinion. – Sadly Not Apr 13 '11 at 16:27
  • I fully agree. However, it all comes down on defining what exactly makes a game huge. Is it the complexity of rules, the existence of a community with authorative people that everybody knows, etc... – Rogier Apr 14 '11 at 17:19
  • In my opinion, huge is self-defined. If there are people who are interested enough in a single game to sustain a SE site completely on their own, then it should be considered. That said, the Area51 filter of followers, commitments, and then beta is likely to ensure very little gets stood up unless it has at least a fighting chance. It's not just game depth and complexity and number of fans, those fans also have to be folks who'd participate in a SE site. – Adam Wuerl Jun 13 '11 at 1:21
1

Looks like the ASL page has been suspended/shut-down for lack of participation. Bridge has been deleted. War Games hasn't had any activity in a month.

Go and Chess are in commitment, as are Magic and Poker. If I had to guess at games that might be able to sustain separate sites Go and Chess would have been on the lsit, but we'll see if they can make it to and through beta. I'm still inclined to think that being all together would be better and my guess is that if they fail or take too long folks may start swinging by here to try it out.

Tags are so flexible and SO is such a good model for how a diversity of topics can survive together.

2
  • 1
    Go might make it to beta; Chess isn't likely to. With a commitment score of 25%, only 4 commits in the last month ... I suppose it could still happen (and I would fulfill my commitment if so) but I'm not counting on it. In the meantime, there's been an obvious influx of bridge questions since that proposal was removed (if primarily from one source, IIRC he's specifically mentioned the deleted proposal as why), so maybe Chess failing would help BCG. – Dave DuPlantis Jun 13 '11 at 20:12
  • @Dave: I fully agree. While I'd be excited to find that there are 200 or more BCG members that play chess/are interested in chess, I don't think it's the case. I see that many of the committers to Chess are not on this site. Given that, it seems logical that they are holding all their input back until they can push Chess through to beta, which would definitely detract from this site. – Daniel Jun 24 '11 at 18:27

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .