The Elite Forum

The Big Three Plus One => GoldenEye 007 => Topic started by: Whiteted on September 24, 2020, 04:31:28 pm

Title: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Whiteted on September 24, 2020, 04:31:28 pm

We're making a wiki! The idea has been around a while but has crystalised in this originally meme thread (https://forums.the-elite.net/index.php?topic=23778.msg467874#msg467874).
It's full of lots of good posts such as those of SammyLiimex and Watertemple there, and more and more wiki discussion as you go on.

As set out in my recent post there:

I think the thing to do now is to discuss the level pages, and ideally for people to make demo pages on Speedrunwiki (https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Main_Page) to show off their ideas.

I think it's essential to consider a range of levels, because a template made just for one won't fit many others. For instance I was thinking that Bunker 1 00A grenade strat would be another big strat page - but the main complexity is Boris and is in common with the TAS strat, so this probably doesn't belong there. Now we need to think if there's some section, common to most levels, which controlling Boris belongs in, or whether Bunker 1 will just have this special section - since it will certainly be common to all strats on the stage.

Post your layout ideas and discuss strengths and any weaknesses of potential ideas. All ideas are welcome, even without a post to SRW - though it's probably a good exercise to test your idea and better it, and helps others to see its value too. We need to demonstrate to The Flash (I knew your real name once but I forgot :angel: ) that we are keen, so we can get wiki.the-elite.net and keep the-elite super classy.

I quote from the ideas set out in the original thread, but if the OPs / a mod could copy them here that would be great.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Seanjohn on September 24, 2020, 05:49:54 pm

Quote from: Whiteted on September 24, 2020, 04:31:28 pm

I think it's essential to consider a range of levels, because a template made just for one won't fit many others. For instance I was thinking that Bunker 1 00A grenade strat would be another big strat page - but the main complexity is Boris and is in common with the TAS strat, so this probably doesn't belong there. Now we need to think if there's some section, common to most levels, which controlling Boris belongs in, or whether Bunker 1 will just have this special section - since it will certainly be common to all strats on the stage.

Boris' behavior is quite complex and unique, and most people don't need to know every facet of his behavior in order to play the level unless they are going for near WR times. I think one goal of the wiki should be that it is useful at all levels of play. To that end, I would say the IL should have many different strats of varying speed and difficulty, and in each one just describe Boris' behavior in the least amount of complexity and technical detail required to understand what you're supposed to do as the player. Beyond that, the technical details of his behavior would belong on an "NPC Behaviors" page, under the Boris (Bunker 1) section. This would show the more complex details such as how he is alerted, how he chooses where to run, how he checks whether Bond has him at gunpoint (and how often), how and when he surrenders etc, and how to use these behaviors to manipulate him. It would also have more technical knowledge such as links to the function explorer.

Continuing this example, the "NPC Behaviors" page would also have behavior for all other NPCs categorized. For example Trev on Caverns, Ouro on Silo, and Boris on Control all exhibit the same type of behavior and can be lumped together. They start running when you enter their LoS (though Boris has some theatrics first) and they run to a specific spot and despawn while closing any open doors they pass through (From a code-reusability standpoint I would assume Boris does this, but there are no doors he passes through). Information on their behavior can help newer players learn how to outrun Ouro/Trev (for example if you shoot at Trev's feet when you open the elevator on Caverns he is more likely to spin and buy you some time). Mishkin on Archives and Val on Streets/Statue exhibit the same behavior and can be lumped together as well. They both start a speech when you enter their LoS and then you have to wait for the speech to finish in order to complete an objective, but they are strafe-able and can be moved during this time.

We should have a lot of general knowledge articles like this (everything in the Facts Topic for example should be put into the wiki also for cross-linking) that way we don't bog down IL levels with duplicate explanations for things like the best death animations or drone timings. if someone already knows what strafing Val is from Statue, they don't need another how-to when it comes to strafing Mishkin to open the door on Archives, or strafing Val to the corner of the room on Streets. We would just say "strafe Mishkin close enough to open the door and then strafe him back to the safe" and then link to the NPC behaviors for that type of NPC, which would include a small subsection on how to strafe them.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: RWG on September 24, 2020, 05:57:19 pm

Anything that is complex enough to merit its own 2-3 paragraph article, should get one.  Thus, on the main-level walkthroughs, you can just link to said complex article if the reader needs to learn more.

"Val Strafe (Statue)" "Val Strafe (Streets)" "Flight Recorder" "Boris" "Trevelyan (Cradle)" "Trevelyan (Caverns)" "Boost" "Mishkin (Archives)"... all of these quickly come to mind as items that could definitely use their own pages.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Whiteted on September 24, 2020, 06:29:10 pm

Quote from: Icy on September 23, 2020, 07:56:16 pm

For example, the structuring for level tutorials could be Overview -> Agent -> Secret Agent - > 00 Agent. Have general objective knowledge and major level tricks under overview, before going into the fine details of each difficulty (also dependent on level such as Bunker 2 vs Cradle).

Include textbook runs that don't have anything distracting or obscure happening. Perhaps even get some runs with the intention of them specific to the wiki.

Based on use, I think it would be worthwhile including various technical details as well such as how long Valentin's total speech is on Statue, where each Baron must be hit to kill, how the Aztec glass and guards work, etc. It may help to have specific pages for things like guard animations, weapons stats, and the like too.

Ideally, it's completely comprehensive, but also easily navigable depending on how much information the reader wants.

Firstly I just want to confirm the seperation between strategies and tutorials. We definitely should have text tutorials (whether complimenting vids or being the only existing form of tute), but I see some distinction. I guess what I really imagine is stacked cups with facts innermost, then strategies, then tutorials. As much as possible (which probably isn't completely) I think we want to pull these apart, extracting facts from strategies, and strategies from tutorials. I think the second one is a very gray area, but for instance with 2.3:

I list 6 pieces of "tech (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6zdci31Qss&t=4482)" in my tute:

• Pinning the spare guard. Explaining how the unloaded movement of that guard causes a problem is a clear strategy thing to me. Likewise where you need to be when you do the pause to keep the guard's eye's on you.
• Noise - this is quite a mix I think. You could present which guards have hearing in a facts-y setting. Then your ammo restrictions in the agent route are quite a strategy thing. But dealing with 1/2/3 guard corridors while staying within the noise limit is very much something for the tute.
• Death animations - certainly it's own page in the more general sense. Perhaps shooting limbs will be a section on that page. The 2.3 page should only mention how these death animations fit into the wider strategy: i.e. any vaguely decent one will do for 22, and 21 will need a good one unless you strafe the corridor more aggresively. Generally pace to that hostage is more critical. That's strategy to me.
• The bug throw is a proper piece of tech / a trick. It belongs seperate to the 2.3 tutorial, even above any A / SA / 00A split. Tbh I think it could link off to it's own page with a tute of it's own - plenty of people (myself included when I'm not lined up) struggle with it
• Never look back - mostly a strat thing, underpinned by a link to the pure technical page on unloaded / loaded guards.
• Backstrafe warp - this is largely a tutorial thing to me. Where you can be and have the bug land is more of a facts thing. The choice of waiting in front (22) or warping through (21) is largely a strategy thing, but there's a lot of subtlety to it when dealing with the potential guard there and keeping the hostage's door off screen.

I guess really I see strategy as more high level, and whenever you get into nitty gritty or specific movement or very local 'strategies' I see it as tutorial stuff.

And I'd agree I think tech / tricks might well be a good idea for a section, since it's quite generic. Lots of levels have these atomic ideas which are reused in different strats. General objective knowledge and these textbook runs are excellent ideas. I could easily overlook saying how many hostages you actually need to release on A/SA/00A :LOL:

Quote from: flicker on September 23, 2020, 10:54:14 pm

I'm all in support of a new wiki and I'd love to help out putting it together.

Last year Vitor actually did make a really nice wiki page for the level Deep Sea, particularly Agent (the SA/PA sections are unfinished/old) http://www.speedrunwiki.com/Deep_Sea:_Nullify_Threat (http://www.speedrunwiki.com/Deep_Sea:_Nullify_Threat)
So with this we have something to use as a modern baseline but this was pretty much done by Vitor alone and few people have ever even seen it, so it can be made cleaner, more concise, etc.

I really like the "other references" before launching into strategies / tute. We've got some great video tutes and we should link those front and centre. Vitor's background section is also nice and brief, chatty but really covers the main ideas. The "For reasons unknown.." setence seems completely out of place - perhaps we need a section in our template for dealing with mysteries or some such? In before PD's heaftiest sections  :smirk:

Vitor's done a good job of pulling out what's common to all difficulties. Elvis consistency kinda fits into this "tech / tricks" section - maybe PD could expand it to "themes / focuses / issues / bottlenecks / ?". Or just add another section?

The perfect agent section (I know this is old) is pure tute : For me that should be on a seperate page in our wiki.

I also think it's fundamentally a messy level, with Elvis at the start especially. It lacks pictures just for readability but there's probably not a huge number that would be relevant. Very solid especially for 1 person's work.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: mw on September 24, 2020, 07:10:52 pm

Each level difficulty should have its own article, with the top subheading being something along the lines of "Version/Settings Considerations", which would tell you things like, NTSC-J is bad on Infil Agent, or that you want Full on Dam Agent, or that you want to have your Mauler set to Charge on Attack Ship. Each page could also link to a full article entirely about version differences and settings.

I would also include the Objectives as a subheading for each level, just as a quick reference and for those playing on Japanese. The rest of the article would then describe the world record strategy, perhaps some old strategies, link some selected runs, and discuss potential timesavers that haven't yet been utilized (a la the strategy compendium topic).

In general the entire wiki would follow Henrik's outline from that thread.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Alka Maass on September 24, 2020, 07:47:54 pm

I think the general layout for every level should be

- Objectives
- Version differences

- Video tutorials (link them under this heading)

- General guides: for levels like S2 00 and frigate, it'd probably be a good idea to do it like what icy said here https://forums.the-elite.net/index.php?topic=23778.msg467948#msg467948 and make it more modular

I think we need to agree on a layout we can use for every single level

also it'd be a good idea to combine levels that are basically the same (Statue, Egypt, Surface 1 SA/00 for example) into one page

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Wyst3r on September 25, 2020, 03:12:57 am

As Whiteted stated, facts and strategies need to be separated, so I imagine the strategy pages would heavily rely on the facts pages. So for Bunker 1 this could be:

- Bunker 1
    - Overview?
    - Objectives?
    - Versions?
    - Facts
        - Guards? (hearing ability/nade odds/spawns etc...)
        - Boris (explain everything about his scripts/behavior, but no mention of how this is used in a run)
    - Strategies
        - General?
        - Difficulty-specific
            - Agent
            - Secret Agent
            - 00 Agent (link to Boris facts page, and explain what the player should to do take advantage of it)
    - Tutorials (Maybe put this under difficulty-specific?)

Not sure how the strategies section should be subdivided, since we have both strats for specific sections of a level, and overall routes for the level. Take Aztec as an example, most of the level is the same, and the strats mostly differs when it comes to the glass lure:

- Aztec
    - Strategies
        - General
            - Glass lure
                - Mainframe (Slow) (Describe only the lure itself, ignore rest of the level)
                - Mainframe (Fast)
                - Crouch
                - Clemens
                - Boss (Deprecated)
                - Henrik
        - Difficulty-specific (Should anything be in here? All difficulties are effectively the same)
            ...

Where should the overall routes go?

Quote

"Val Strafe (Statue)" "Val Strafe (Streets)" "Flight Recorder" "Boris" "Trevelyan (Cradle)" "Trevelyan (Caverns)" "Boost" "Mishkin (Archives)"... all of these quickly come to mind as items that could definitely use their own pages.

Yes, and the Val strafe ones should probably link to a more general NPC strafing page, outlining the basics of the technique:
- General
    - Tricks/Strategies
        - NPC strafing

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: destrukt on September 25, 2020, 05:40:11 am

For the level-specific pages, I think this is really important:

Quote from: Whiteted on September 24, 2020, 06:29:10 pm

[...] I think we want to pull these apart, extracting facts from strategies, and strategies from tutorials. [...]

When multiple strategies are available for the same section of a level, it is also really important to explain WHY a certain strategy is the preferred one. It happens every now and then in speedgames that a non-optimal strategy is used simply because everyone is used to it and doesn't question the strat. Meanwhile through new information the reason for the strategy in question can now be dealt with in a better way.

Quote from: Wyst3r on September 25, 2020, 03:12:57 am

    - Facts
        - Guards? (hearing ability/nade odds/spawns etc...)
        - Boris (explain everything about his scripts/behavior, but no mention of how this is used in a run)

Facts should probably contain every interactable object in the level. Guards, body armor, boxes, doors, etc). Probably marked in a map of the stage.

Edit: Didn't know about these maps:

Spoiler

(https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/n64/197462-goldeneye-007/map/5786?raw=1)

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Wyst3r on September 25, 2020, 06:26:49 am

Quote

it is also really important to explain WHY a certain strategy is the preferred one. It happens every now and then in speedgames that a non-optimal strategy is used simply because everyone is used to it and doesn't question the strat.

I wonder if the wiki should mention "preferred" strats at all. The problems with this is that it might encourage usage of non-optimal strats like you mention. Also it will quickly go out-of-date when meta changes, and on some levels like Aztec there are multiple viable strats. Even describing WR strat might not make sense, since two poeple might have achieved WR with different strats.

Pros/Cons of each strat would be better I think, then the reader can decide for themselves.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Cal on September 25, 2020, 09:53:50 am

Pros/cons with a link to example runs would be the way to do it, kinda like that Icy Defence write up

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Whiteted on September 25, 2020, 05:24:27 pm

Quote from: Wyst3r on September 25, 2020, 03:12:57 am

So for Bunker 1 this could be:

- Bunker 1
    - Overview?
    - Objectives?
    - Versions?
    - Facts
        - Guards? (hearing ability/nade odds/spawns etc...)
        - Boris (explain everything about his scripts/behavior, but no mention of how this is used in a run)
    - Strategies
        - General?
        - Difficulty-specific
            - Agent
            - Secret Agent
            - 00 Agent (link to Boris facts page, and explain what the player should to do take advantage of it)
    - Tutorials (Maybe put this under difficulty-specific?)

I like this layout a lot, especially the order overview, objectives, version differences. For Boris in the facts there I assume you are linking off to a seperate Boris fact pages? I don't really see the need for this, when you can just link to that page directly when you mention Boris in the strats section. I agree with the idea of explaining Boris largely outside of the context of a run, leaving that for a strategy section. It's the same concept that I was getting at with the pinning the spare guard tech: unloaded movement will be a page generally, then the strategy explains how that's relevant here. Goose's existing tute is good in the sense that people don't need to know what's going on, but it's bad because it's so much like "do exactly this and everything will go fine" - it doesn't have that understanding (linked) behind it.

I'm worried about listing details getting dull, so I'm keen for the "level facts" i.e. grenade guards, spawns, patrols, hearing to be on clear maps. B1 is a good example because there's lot of grenade guards with different odds - I think the one for 00A is 1 in 25? or there abouts, while the one around the corner is 1 in 10 - and loves blowing up Boris :) . These could be really standardised (and auto-generated), like a grenade next to their dot could be scaled with the odds, from aztec guards or that grenade guard on cavs to whatever that super rare guard is on Cavs is - 1 in 240 iirc :rollin: . So I'd probably just replace your facts section with 'maps' - hopefully any other things will be caught by 'tech / tricks'?

In general I'd have tech / tricks as the first sub-section of strategies, but I'm not sure that there's anything to put in it for B1. Most of what needs saying on manipulating Boris is either in the dedicated facts page, or belongs to a specific strat. That said, from the stairs upwards is common to both current WR strat and the Early Running Boris. Maybe this could go in tech? Perhaps NPC behaviour is going to be a common idea? i.e. Cradle, Control, Streets kinda, Bunker 1, Facility (Cavern's scientists are reused scripts iirc). Or maybe we do want to put it in the Boris page. Presumably this will be called "Boris (Bunker 1)", but I'd still rather not mention strat stuff there. We could have "Boris strategies (Bunker 1)" as a page? Not sure what I think of that.

And I think keep tutorials at the bottom, opening with links to vid tutes, much like Vitor did. A good example of something which imo fits in the tute but not strategy is all the movement early on in B1 00A.

Quote from: Wyst3r on September 25, 2020, 03:12:57 am

Not sure how the strategies section should be subdivided, since we have both strats for specific sections of a level, and overall routes for the level. Take Aztec as an example, most of the level is the same, and the strats mostly differs when it comes to the glass lure:

I think this is quite easy to resolve by making the glass its own page - If any piece of tech deserves one it's aztec glass.

Quote from: Wyst3r on September 25, 2020, 03:12:57 am

- Aztec
    [..]
Where should the overall routes go?

Is there any difference in overall route when you look at it like this? It's Go to glass, [do glass] (differences are encapsulated in the glass page), go to pipes, [maybe detour for BA], upload, [pipes / box ending]. The choices are contained to that small section.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Wyst3r on September 26, 2020, 04:14:26 am

Quote

For Boris in the facts there I assume you are linking off to a seperate Boris fact pages? I don't really see the need for this, when you can just link to that page directly when you mention Boris in the strats section.

When I wrote this I didn't really consider the single-wiki-page vs separate-linked-page. It was just an attempt to make an overall hierarchy, where anything could be a separate page. But obviously Boris would be a separate page.

Linking facts only from the strat pages doesn't really make sense to me? (unless most facts can be replaced by maps) If a user only wants to find the facts page, then having to go via the strat pages isn't super obvious, where the link might be buried in a wall of text (unless there's a list of facts somewhere at the top). Besides, it's just nice to have all the relevant facts pages for a level neatly listed in one place? (Again, if most of it will be replaced by maps and the section gets too empty then it's a different story)

One alternative could be to replace facts with two sections, one for Maps and another for NPCs (named/unique NPCs, so Trev/Doak/Boris/Natalya etc..., or perhaps the guards on Train).

Quote

I'm worried about listing details getting dull, so I'm keen for the "level facts" i.e. grenade guards, spawns, patrols, hearing to be on clear maps. B1 is a good example because there's lot of grenade guards with different odds - I think the one for 00A is 1 in 25? or there abouts, while the one around the corner is 1 in 10 - and loves blowing up Boris :) . These could be really standardised (and auto-generated), like a grenade next to their dot could be scaled with the odds, from aztec guards or that grenade guard on cavs to whatever that super rare guard is on Cavs is - 1 in 240 iirc :rollin: . So I'd probably just replace your facts section with 'maps' - hopefully any other things will be caught by 'tech / tricks'?

Yes, maps would obviously be better, and for guards especially it'd help to convey which guard we're actually talking about. One possibility could be to have a box next to each guard listing all his properties? (including Health/BA/Weapon/Nade odds etc...)

Also this is probably too ambitious, but perhaps an interactive map could be even better. To avoid cluttering or massive image files, you could zoom in/out, pan around the map, click on guards to highlight their path and get that properties box I mentioned above etc...

Quote

In general I'd have tech / tricks as the first sub-section of strategies, but I'm not sure that there's anything to put in it for B1. Most of what needs saying on manipulating Boris is either in the dedicated facts page, or belongs to a specific strat. That said, from the stairs upwards is common to both current WR strat and the Early Running Boris. Maybe this could go in tech? Perhaps NPC behaviour is going to be a common idea? i.e. Cradle, Control, Streets kinda, Bunker 1, Facility (Cavern's scientists are reused scripts iirc). Or maybe we do want to put it in the Boris page. Presumably this will be called "Boris (Bunker 1)", but I'd still rather not mention strat stuff there. We could have "Boris strategies (Bunker 1)" as a page? Not sure what I think of that.

Not sure which behaviors you are referring to here? But I'd put all common behaviors under General -> NPCs (I had this named "Guards" in my post from the other topic, but "NPCs" is more accurate). Basically a page(s) describing all reused scripts as well as movement/animations etc...

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Whiteted on September 26, 2020, 05:42:39 am

Quote from: Wyst3r on September 26, 2020, 04:14:26 am

Quote

Perhaps NPC behaviour is going to be a common idea? i.e. Cradle, Control, Streets kinda, Bunker 1, Facility (Cavern's scientists are reused scripts iirc).

Not sure which behaviors you are referring to here? But I'd put all common behaviors under General -> NPCs (I had this named "Guards" in my post from the other topic, but "NPCs" is more accurate). Basically a page(s) describing all reused scripts as well as movement/animations etc...

I wasn't very clear but I was suggesting "NPC behaviour" as a section under a level, which would in your lanaguage there contain all relevant level-specific behaviours (unique scripts), like Boris on B1. I think the full detail (of the 6E cmd largely) should be on a seperate page, but maybe under "NPC behaviour" we could have some summary - i.e. covering his 1 in 5 chance to turn left at the top of the stairs even when you do it correctly. For instance on Jungle in this section we could say "Nat can kill guards and even Xenia but we leave her behind except on (D)TLK" or similar.

I agree common behaviours (like Cavern's scientists - they are the same or very similar to other scientists iirc) should be off on their own pages only.

Quote from: Wyst3r on September 26, 2020, 04:14:26 am

Quote

For Boris in the facts there I assume you are linking off to a seperate Boris fact pages? I don't really see the need for this, when you can just link to that page directly when you mention Boris in the strats section.

Linking facts only from the strat pages doesn't really make sense to me? (unless most facts can be replaced by maps) If a user only wants to find the facts page, then having to go via the strat pages isn't super obvious, where the link might be buried in a wall of text (unless there's a list of facts somewhere at the top). Besides, it's just nice to have all the relevant facts pages for a level neatly listed in one place? (Again, if most of it will be replaced by maps and the section gets too empty then it's a different story)

One alternative could be to replace facts with two sections, one for Maps and another for NPCs (named/unique NPCs, so Trev/Doak/Boris/Natalya etc..., or perhaps the guards on Train).

Hmmm okay :) I hadn't thought of it like that, I'll try it out when I make the one for Frigate.

Quote from: Wyst3r on September 26, 2020, 04:14:26 am

Quote

I'm worried about listing details getting dull, so I'm keen for the "level facts" i.e. grenade guards, spawns, patrols, hearing to be on clear maps.

Yes, maps would obviously be better..
Also this is probably too ambitious, but perhaps an interactive map could be even better.

Yes for sure, but I dunno how hard it would be. A big zoomable picture would be a good start.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Wyst3r on September 26, 2020, 11:13:47 am

Quote

I wasn't very clear but I was suggesting "NPC behaviour" as a section under a level, which would in your lanaguage there contain all relevant level-specific behaviours (unique scripts), like Boris on B1. I think the full detail (of the 6E cmd largely) should be on a seperate page, but maybe under "NPC behaviour" we could have some summary - i.e. covering his 1 in 5 chance to turn left at the top of the stairs even when you do it correctly. For instance on Jungle in this section we could say "Nat can kill guards and even Xenia but we leave her behind except on (D)TLK" or similar.

Yeah so I think that's what I was referring to with

Quote

and another for NPCs (named/unique NPCs, so Trev/Doak/Boris/Natalya etc..., or perhaps the guards on Train).

So something like this?

- Bunker 1
    - Overview
    - Objectives
    - Versions
    - NPCs
        - Boris (Links to 6E page for more details, but includes relevant conclusions)
    - Map
    - Strategies
    - Tutorials

This would work for something like Frigate since hostages are easily identified and poeple understand who it refers to:

- NPCs
    - Hostages

But what happens when guards with unique behaviors aren't easily identified:

- NPCs
    - Random guards who look identical to other guards but just happens to be running a different script

In this case we probably need the Map to identify them.

Quote

Nat can kill guards and even Xenia but we leave her behind except on (D)TLK"

First half seems fine, but I think the part about leaving her behind belongs under Strategies?

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: vitorr on September 27, 2020, 03:53:14 pm

TIP: let's do a write up for one level using one of these formats to see how it looks like!

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Worlds-One on September 28, 2020, 03:37:26 am

Quote from: Wyst3r on September 25, 2020, 03:12:57 am

As Whiteted stated, facts and strategies need to be separated, so I imagine the strategy pages would heavily rely on the facts pages. So for Bunker 1 this could be:

- Bunker 1
    - Overview?
    - Objectives?
    - Versions?
    - Facts
        - Guards? (hearing ability/nade odds/spawns etc...)
        - Boris (explain everything about his scripts/behavior, but no mention of how this is used in a run)
    - Strategies
        - General?
        - Difficulty-specific
            - Agent
            - Secret Agent
            - 00 Agent (link to Boris facts page, and explain what the player should to do take advantage of it)
    - Tutorials (Maybe put this under difficulty-specific?)

Not sure how the strategies section should be subdivided, since we have both strats for specific sections of a level, and overall routes for the level. Take Aztec as an example, most of the level is the same, and the strats mostly differs when it comes to the glass lure:

- Aztec
    - Strategies
        - General
            - Glass lure
                - Mainframe (Slow) (Describe only the lure itself, ignore rest of the level)
                - Mainframe (Fast)
                - Crouch
                - Clemens
                - Boss (Deprecated)
                - Henrik
        - Difficulty-specific (Should anything be in here? All difficulties are effectively the same)
            ...

Where should the overall routes go?

Quote

"Val Strafe (Statue)" "Val Strafe (Streets)" "Flight Recorder" "Boris" "Trevelyan (Cradle)" "Trevelyan (Caverns)" "Boost" "Mishkin (Archives)"... all of these quickly come to mind as items that could definitely use their own pages.

Yes, and the Val strafe ones should probably link to a more general NPC strafing page, outlining the basics of the technique:
- General
    - Tricks/Strategies
        - NPC strafing

Pretty clean and easily identifiable

some cool looking emotes or "bullet points" could be an interesting addition with a "key" specifying said emotes - I.E crosshairs = the given level - bullet points = sub topics facts strats etc  - badges or stars or another emote indicating the difficulties (A,SA,OOA) - Other compelling ideas or just the plain clean text works like whats quoted

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Whiteted on September 28, 2020, 01:32:37 pm

Quote from: vitorr on September 27, 2020, 03:53:14 pm

TIP: let's do a write up for one level using one of these formats to see how it looks like!

^ HOT TIP

Also new thought about the facts - I'd be happier with it as like an "index" i.e. the section is at the end.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Whiteted on October 03, 2020, 07:38:00 pm

https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Frigate_new (https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Frigate_new)

I've started making up my Frigate demo page. I've mostly stuck to what we set out above, except that at least currently I've got a "constraints" section. I think they'll end up going down in the "Detail" section, which I see as the "Facts" section that I've demoted below strategies, as I discussed in a previous post here. Also I have prominent "hostages" section which I see as breaking from the standard template, but with good reason. I'm trying to keep it brief, and I may trim it down a bit more tbh.

I've included 'misconceptions' in my strategies section, and I'm trying to give concise summaries of each of the strats, then linking of to a specific strat page which I'm imagining will end with / link to some tute. Broadly this looks similar to Icy's strats post :)

Quote from: Wyst3r on September 25, 2020, 06:26:49 am

Pros/Cons of each strat would be better I think, then the reader can decide for themselves.

On this I was thinking we could have a seperate 'strategy recommendations' page for each level. This would keep a nice seperation between facts & strat encyclopedia-ing and this less permenant, more opiniony material. If it fell out of date then it wouldn't taint the original page, and it would be easier to review the advice if it's all on one page.

I'll finish off the text and start playing with some images tomorrow.

The main take away for me is how much I'm linking off to other pages i.e. gadgets, which will explain that these can't be equiped without pausing; and projectile, which will say about them being thrown from your right hip and various technical details about how they can bounce etc.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Cal on October 06, 2020, 08:13:10 am

What's the migration effort from one Wiki to another?

Should we just start building stuff in SRW and then migrate, or do we need to get the end platform stood up before we go to the effort of writing all these articles?

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Whiteted on October 06, 2020, 01:40:04 pm

I think the plan is to only do demos on SRW so we will hardly be migrating. Just trying to show our keenness and try stuff out.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: TheFlash on October 06, 2020, 03:24:13 pm

Moving any amount of content over is mostly mechanical and doesn't require the creativity/hard work of actually writing things, so don't let that fear stop you.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Whiteted on October 31, 2020, 08:31:25 pm

Maps!

https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Frigate_new#Map (https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Frigate_new#Map)

The auto-generated maps are making good progress - most of the features are there now. In particular:

• Door reachability - showing where you can open doors from, a cool combination of expanding the door by 1.5m and and 2m circle.
• Object activation- / Using a gadget- circles (pressing z basically). You also have to be looking within 22.5 degrees of it unless it's an aircraft but that's harder to depict
• Guard pathing module - you only have to say "draw the hostage's path to pad X" and the python code can work it out.
• Excessively accurate sphere-intersecting-clipping for the hostage escape areas.
• Door swings (needs a little tweaking for doors which can go both ways)
• Collectible objects

Still to come:

• Maps for all levels (next)
• Much more detail on the guards / NPC, including weapons and grenade odds
• More text i.e. naming areas and parts of the map, arrows linking them.
• Specialist maps i.e. Bunker 1 Boris (much simplier than my previous one), Control protect area (I'm hoping it can explain nat spinning)
• Anything else people want to see

Once I've got maps for all levels I'm going to do a bit of a recruitment drive so free up your diaries :)

I'd also welcome people contributing to the programming:
https://github.com/whiteted-strats/GE_Wiki_Maps (https://github.com/whiteted-strats/GE_Wiki_Maps)

(https://i.imgur.com/tJTXU8r.png)

Belongs in GE porn tbh ^

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: tolos on July 02, 2021, 05:57:04 pm

I merged the frigate_new page into the regular page. The content is all there (with exception noted below), but I did make some editorial decisions. The only thing I did not include was the trivia section

Quote

Trivia sections should only remain in an article temporarily, as a step towards integration of the information

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Handling_trivia

Well, and I took out some "see ??" or "to be written" things.

The editorial decisions were to keep it somewhat inline with other content. Of course, this is a community project, so we can always adjust it. Anyways, seeing Whiteted's frigate page and merging it into the existing page kind of solidified some things for me.

First is distinction between "tutorial" and "strategy". These were kind of blurred before in my mind. Now I think almost all the existing content on SRW should fall under the "tutorial" category. I think these brief thematic explanations Whiteted gives are more "strategy". Strategies would be short summaries, "Use 2.3 to free a hostage in the opening cinema", that kind of thing (not quite that short on the actual wiki).

Now, for the editorial decisions. You can visit the page https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Frigate to see how it's laid out, but it follows this outline:

Code: [Select]

Overview
Objectives
 - Common
 - SA/00
Map
Facts
 - Hostages
 - Hostage Takers
Tech
Strategies
 - Overview
 - Agent
 - Secret Agent
 - 00 Agent
 - LTK
 - DLTK
Debunked Strategies
Tutorials
 - Agent
    - Target time 0:23
 - Secret Agent
    - Target time 1:00
 - 00 Agent (empty)
World Record Reference
 - Agent
 - Secret Agent
 - 00 Agent
 - LTK
 - DLTK
External Links

There's not much on SRW right now, but I'll follow the above outline for other pages and update accordingly.

Edit: also, I tried to make that gigantic map picture more manageable, but not sure I made things better or worse.

FWIW Whiteted, I want to contribute to you python map project for the remaining levels after getting some more initial wiki work done.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Whiteted on July 02, 2021, 08:30:43 pm

Insane wiki activity :laugh:

Quote from: tolos on July 02, 2021, 05:57:04 pm

The only thing I did not include was the trivia section

Quote

Trivia sections should only remain in an article temporarily, as a step towards integration of the information

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Handling_trivia

Nice to see that my purpose aligned so precisely with this here :LOL: . Those 2 facts don't really fit anywhere but are relevant and should have a home somewhere, hence the trivia section. Just getting rid of them isn't a solution.

Quote

The editorial decisions were to keep it somewhat inline with other content

There's no need to keep it inline with the old stuff that's there. Flicking through the levels all I see in the old content is text tutorials.

Quote

Now I think almost all the existing content on SRW should fall under the "tutorial" category.

Ah yep we agree.

Quote

First is distinction between "tutorial" and "strategy". These were kind of blurred before in my mind.  I think these brief thematic explanations Whiteted gives are more "strategy".

Yes I think that part of the frigate new page is particularly strong, you should be able to compare strategies without reading tutorials about them, and you can glance down the page and be aware of all the strats.


As for your page I've got some thoughts beyond the trivia:

• The tutorials definitely belong on separate pages. Exactly how this will manifest will depend on the level but here clearly those 2 can live in the non-existant pages that I've linked to in the strategies section. Having them on the same page is very cluttered, and you can never have a tutorial without a strategy, and there are multiple strategies on frigate so it makes sense. On something like facility it might work less well because there's only the one route, but still it shouldn't be on the same page.
• What's become the bigger hostages section probably needed a rewrite anyway but I don't think bundling it together works.
  
  Quote from: Whiteted on October 03, 2020, 07:38:00 pm

  At least currently I've got a "constraints" section. I think they'll end up going down in the "Detail" section, which I see as the "Facts" section that I've demoted below strategies, as I discussed in a previous post here. Also I have prominent "hostages" section which I see as breaking from the standard template, but with good reason. I'm trying to keep it brief, and I may trim it down a bit more tbh.
  

  I was trying to separate more relevant hostage 'facts' from less relevant 'details'. The stuff about hostage takers under detail on the frigate new page explains some funny phenomenon and gives you the precise times before the takers shoot but it's not so relevant. If you aren't quick enough, the hostage dies - everyone knows that.
  
  The main part of the hostages section is about escape points, which really is important. The sentence about "Hostage released!" should be cut, but otherwise it's all very relevant.
  
  I think this kind of distinction between 'key facts' and 'details' is a good one.
  
  
• And speaking of the 'constraints' section again it was an attempt at something which would work as a general template. But I'm not against those moving into the hostage section.
  
• Moving 'Bridge hostage early escape' from tech I'm not against but the thinking was that it's a fact that inspires strats, and that he either escapes early or not for ages is worthy of the nice bullet pointed list. Maybe it does belong in the hostages section but with some pictures because it's a wall of text.
• Misconceptions is broader than debunked strategies, so will work better as a standard-ish template.
• I don't really see the point of a shadow copy of the current WRs. Maybe some of the runs will get mentioned and linked in places but having a seperate section is just unnecessary work & clutter. Perhaps there could be a link on each level page to the stage rankings like https://rankings.the-elite.net/goldeneye/stage/frigate (https://rankings.the-elite.net/goldeneye/stage/frigate).

Quote

Edit: also, I tried to make that gigantic map picture more manageable, but not sure I made things better or worse.

Yeah they were a bit big but they were alongside each other. When the wiki maps code is a bit improved it'll be able to generate different detail / scale maps more easily but atm the detail is everything and the size is large. This will come out in the wash eventually. Putting those bits of text as titles on the map won't be hard, and then you could put them alongside each other again.

Quote

FWIW Whiteted, I want to contribute to you python map project for the remaining levels after getting some more initial wiki work done.

 :azn: sounds good to me

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: tolos on July 02, 2021, 09:14:38 pm

I want to think about this some more before making any other changes. Maybe bounce some ideas around. 

Quote

The tutorials definitely belong on separate pages.

I think that needs to happen, or the level page will get too long. But I think there needs to be some quick access to something that explains what to do to complete the level, from the level page. So some kind of direct link to this tutorial information needs to exist on the level page. Under strategies? Or a tutorials section? I don't know.

"facts" and "detail" -- I sort of see the distinction you're making, but this is a wiki so I think detail is ok. Maybe the more general information in an overview section / at the start of the strategy section? Or maybe "facts" and "details" really should be two separate sections on the level page? I just feel like the word "facts" imparts a great a deal of importance, and for your page it seems relegated to simple summary information.

Can you give some other examples of where "constraints" makes sense on other levels? Hostage constraints just seemed so specific to Frigate that I rolled it into the other section. I guess I'm just not seeing the need for this. On the other hand, I guess it could be alright that some levels deviate a little from an ideal template. Or maybe other levels have similar constraints I just haven't considered. (I'm the least qualified person to write about strategy on the wiki)

For world records, I think it is almost useless extra work to list this on the page, except that I think it gives a good point of reference for the tutorials listed on the page. If someone is looking for information (reading a wiki), then I think this is helpful. I don't know if it makes sense to list this adjacent to the tutorials (how the pages were before), or in a separate section (as it is now on Frigate) ...  3rd option, maybe use wikipedia as an example and list the current WR in a box on the side. For example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1500_metres

I'm going to let it rest and think about this tonight and do some more poking about the site tomorrow.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: TheFlash on July 03, 2021, 02:30:40 pm

This is so cool already, maybe it will get others excited about contributing as well.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Whiteted on July 10, 2021, 08:05:41 am

Quote from: tolos on July 02, 2021, 09:14:38 pm

"facts" and "detail" -- I sort of see the distinction you're making, but this is a wiki so I think detail is ok. Maybe the more general information in an overview section / at the start of the strategy section? Or maybe "facts" and "details" really should be two separate sections on the level page? I just feel like the word "facts" imparts a great a deal of importance, and for your page it seems relegated to simple summary information.

Well I don't have any section on 'frigate new' that is titled facts, but sure to some extent there is a 'summary' / 'details' distinction. I was having a little look over the recent changes last week and the quickpausing section is a good example.

https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Pause (https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Pause)

The piece under "Pausing goes through various numbered stages.." is the very essence of what I'd call detail. It's essentially a summary of the stages that I saw in the code when I reversed it, and is relevant to nearly 0% of wiki readers. Atm it sits above that nice table which people very much will care about, and those worked examples which are super relevant.

That detail should clearly be demoted further down the page imo.

I'll do some work on the wiki this afternoon, probably starting by rewriting Pause. I'll write about my changes after but mostly it'll be actual changes to content.

I also noticed that this facts / strategies template seems to have been imposed pretty rigidly everywhere, but I assume that's just convenient to copy the info into. I'll just make it invisible I think - having a title that says 'facts' seems odd to me, why not just launch into them :)

Quote

Can you give some other examples of where "constraints" makes sense on other levels? Hostage constraints just seemed so specific to Frigate that I rolled it into the other section. I guess I'm just not seeing the need for this. On the other hand, I guess it could be alright that some levels deviate a little from an ideal template. Or maybe other levels have similar constraints I just haven't considered. (I'm the least qualified person to write about strategy on the wiki)

It was definitely a more 'experimental' part of the template, and it sounds a bit odd, but it's definitely not only frigate specific. I might have written about it above but my thinking was something like "subtleties that people won't know". So e.g.s:

• Depot train shot won't work wherever you aim if you shoot too early before the wall
• Anything Boris related on B2 00A i.e. blocking him at the table (though this would be its own section anyway)
• (Inspired by the Icy Matechat) Fullspeed is "like an on-off switch"
• B2 keeping left after the tape to not load the keycard guard
• Control some stuff about Nat (again would surely have its own section / page)

I guess it was stuff like this which is a fundamental part of how the level works which you should know about, as opposed to being especially strat specific. Like whatever TAS strat wizardry you want to do on Frig you'll still need to be aware of those constraints.

But yeah I don't think it especially works generally - just don't go deleting those points :p

Quote

For world records, I think it is almost useless extra work to list this on the page, except that I think it gives a good point of reference for the tutorials listed on the page. If someone is looking for information (reading a wiki), then I think this is helpful. I don't know if it makes sense to list this adjacent to the tutorials (how the pages were before), or in a separate section (as it is now on Frigate) ...  3rd option, maybe use wikipedia as an example and list the current WR in a box on the side. For example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1500_metres

Yeah in a box looks decent, I see that on some? all? of the pages. I see some extensions stuff in the other thread, if it can read automatically from the rankings or something then that would be cool but otherwise it's just a thing to go out of date. It's not too much work to change it each untied (though I see LTK is there too) but again the rankings do a good job, I think it's easier & more concise to just link to it imo. If your tutorial wants to link to a run it can do it by itself.

Also something worth pointing out is most good modern tutorials are videos and should be. I'm not sure it's even sensible to aspire to have text tutorials for all strategies. There should be information about all the strategies on the wiki but quite possibly nothing more than a link to the video tute, and maybe some addendums where necessary (before someone eventually remakes the tute). Another reason why tutorials shouldn't be some fundamental part of the stage pages imo. I appreciate LTK is a different beast.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: tolos on July 10, 2021, 10:48:10 am

ok thanks for the reply Whiteted.

I did want to say my wiki work is more in the "experimental" phase right now. My main priority has been (when I haven't been busy with other things) getting content into the wiki. Layout/formatting/organization (Meta) has been a "find something that makes sense at the time" approach for me because it's easier for me to see what works and what doesn't once there's something to look at. The Overview/Facts/Strategies/Tutorials layout is what I settled on most recently. I can go back and work on the site meta if there's a community consensus about the way things should be (and I think people with more experience with the game than myself should probably have a little more weight in that consensus).

Constraints:
I think I understand what you're saying about constraints, thanks for the examples. I don't really like the name but don't have a better alternative. Like, completing all objectives is a constraint, but the things listed are "currently known constraints for completing the level on world record pace" -- which is sort of the point of the wiki, but I hope it would be useful to people even if you're not trying for WR. Like I said, I don't see a better way to describe that information, so I'll leave it at that.

Facts and details:
I'm getting a better understanding of the layout for these things.

• I would propose changing the name of "Details" to "Technical Details".
• The reason for the "Facts" header is organizational. It adds an entry to the Table of Contents, and it also means you can link to a specific section of page from elsewhere in the wiki. I really think each section should have a title/header for ToC/link purposes (even if it's not called Facts).

site template:
I think it's a good design to be consistent as much as possible, and try to follow a similar layout for the individual level (IL) pages. It helps users navigate the site to find relevant information. There will be exceptions for some levels, but (I think) that would be additional information on top of a "standard" layout (Maybe a Hostages section, for example). At the very least, there should be an explanation somewhere on the page explaining why this page doesn't have content like you can find on other pages (The Duel in PD, for example?). This will break down on other topics, but for other pages in the "GE Strats" category there should be sections with similar titles that you can find on the IL pages: overview, concepts (~ Facts), how to use concepts (~ Strategies), technical details.

video tutorials:
I think we're in agreement about tutorials. Not sure if you've seen the level pages, but the Tutorials section now just lists/links relevant tutorials that have been written on the wiki.

Quote

I'm not sure it's even sensible to aspire to have text tutorials for all strategies.

I agree with this. I think most text tutorials are kind of ... not that great (turn left, turn right, run down the street). I'm just a librarian, not someone that writes tutorials so I won't be creating that kind of content. (ok, maybe for some LTK stuff...) But I think there's merit in having a text explanation for how to tie concepts together (Facts/Strategies/Details) to complete a level. It's good bedtime reading. Plus, I find it impossible to skim through a video, vs skimming through text to find relevant content. IMO, ideally each stage-difficulty should have a text tutorial for, say, at least top pointless times (so it would always be relevant for people reading a wiki to learn about speedrunning), but this is not something I'll be adding if it doesn't already exist. A nice-to-have goal, but a low priority for wiki improvement.

Also (to Whiteted, but more for anyone else reading this), there's a todo page I started: https://www.speedrunwiki.com/GoldenEye:Todo . This is a list of things I want to work on to fix up the wiki but feel free to add to this or take on one of the forum threads listed.

Title: Re: Discuss Wiki Layout & Style here
Post by: Whiteted on July 10, 2021, 04:09:36 pm

Quote

It's easier for me to see what works and what doesn't once there's something to look at. The Overview/Facts/Strategies/Tutorials layout is what I settled on most recently

Yeah for sure, just checking you aren't too attached to it :p
After seeing overview everywhere it's made me dislike it even on the level stages - just cutting the "== Overview ==" puts it up the top and improves it.

Quote

I would propose changing the name of "Details" to "Technical Details"

No objections to this, though much like the heading of facts I don't think the heading of 'technical details' actually has to necessarily exist. If there's only enough to make one section then sure call it that, but it could just as well be a more meaningful name like https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Pausing#Full_pause_process (https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Pausing#Full_pause_process)

I've not tried writing anything for a strategy page but I don't see why it should need to mirror the template for the stage pages necessarily.

Quote

It's good bedtime reading. Plus, I find it impossible to skim through a video, vs skimming through text to find relevant content.

Yes I definitely agree, text does have the benefit that you can search & skip to the right bit much more easily but we just need to keep that contained to info / strats / etc rather than the turn left turn right.

Quote

A nice-to-have goal, but a low priority for wiki improvement.

Hmmm.. I agree with the low priority bit :nesquik: . The only pull of text tutes imo is that we can be (incredibly) slow to make video tutes and something is better than nothing, but yeah, low priority :)

I'll leave the statistical analysis to someone like Sean :LOL: but I think most of the video tutes tend to be made with people who are at least new to the level in mind. Unless there's no tute or an ancient one I think whatever we have is good enough for people to get PTRs. People who are struggling to complete caverns for the first time or something because they aren't speedrunning can struggle by themselves tbh :p . We've all been there.

---

On the todo I was mostly rewriting technical things this afternoon:

https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Pausing (https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Pausing)
https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Lag (https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Lag)
https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Goldeneye%27s_RNG (https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Goldeneye%27s_RNG)
https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Room (https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Room) (which is still bad)

I'll do noise next because I've been meaning to gather the proper info on that for a while.

Moving the facts topic posts has been a useful place to start but don't put too much effort into formatting or w/e because other than the tables in 'Pausing' I did just completely rewrite them, stealing a few nice sentences and such on the way.

And being over zealous isn't really a problem but unless this Miscellaneous Facts (https://www.speedrunwiki.com/Miscellaneous_Facts) page is going to be a temporary home for other stuff it can just go in the bin. There's way more in people's heads - I've added quite a bit just in those rewrites - than you'll find in the forums and just coz something is in the facts topic doesn't mean it's super relevant.. or even a fact :LOL:

That stuff about doors can be mentioned when it's relevant i.e. on S2 the whole reason Finnish window etc. are possible is because those doors are marked as being see-through, and I'll write that when I get there. If you need to make it through a door before it closes, like with the depot mainframe roller door, then that can be written about in its place too.