We dont really have anything concrete its all still just on paper so to speak so if you have a suggestion feel free to add it

I'd try to contribute as well if this goes through.

I'm leaning towards not having any form of "critical" part of the game pages. If they want to see if the game is good, they can come here or read reviews somewhere else. A pure info drop is what the wiki should be.

Thats true, instead of a review section a link to the game page on GOG and we could see if over time we could add more detailed reviews on GOG, or even find reviews we agree with from outside GOG and see if we can get permission to post it here.(with credit going to the author of course.)

The problem with the free wiki stuff is all the ads and the generally shitty hosting.

Are there any ad-free, smooth, paid-for services for this?

If not, PATENT PENDING PATENT PENDING

Aren't all those concerns thrown out the window when we host it ourselves?

I've been turning this in my head and while I agree with the principle it should remain more or less objective, I don't really know what else but reviews should be there. None of the games here are all that obscure; most have their own entry on Wikipedia, (probably) all of them on MobyGames, where you can typically find all release information. What more is there to say about them?

Some games could definitely use a modding guide (like the BG series), and the format is perfect for listing compatibility with various platforms and the other stuff SimonG mentioned. But that still isn't very much information for a wiki. Simply put, including reviews would mean there's more stuff to read on the site, because otherwise it would be pretty barren.

When I say "info drop," what I have in mind is all of the following.

Everything about GOG's release (all the info on the gamecard page: extras, compatibility, download size, etc.), plus amp-ed up information; is the game the floppy or CD version, etc.
Modding guides and common tweaks.
Troubleshooting: A list of common issues for the game. (If the game uses DOSBox, then all the basic DOSBox solutions. (For instance, how to change from windowed to full screen.) The same for SCUMMVM.)
Compatibility. Netbook, Mac, Linux, etc.
Listing of differences between a GOG release and other releases of that game. (Features, what files are missing, etc.)
Links to purchase the game, fan sites, other modding guides, extras.

My conception of the GOG wiki wasn't really something akin to a large encyclopedic entry. Just a resource updated often to keep people informed of various aspects of a GOG game. It isn't a complete replacement for GOG's support or features, but a supplementary resource. It would be nice to have a set location to which we can refer people.

The placement of reviews could work, but going along with this "supplementary" mentality, it seems to be a bit of an information overload.

You know, it does sound quite nice when you put it that way. And useful.

The remaining problem is, how to make sure people actually use it. Because something tells me stickies don't quite work.

The only thing we can do is just endlessly link it around. Put it in every thread.

Not saying its a bad idea. To have a wiki of our own for GOG would be both a tremendous undertaking and tremendously rewarding as well. But...

GameFaqs has a crapload of info on a crapload of games from a crapload of gaming eras for a crapload of consoles including the pc.

Hmmm..."crapload"...can you tell I spend my day changing the dirty diapers of my triplet daughters?

It's not a wiki for MobyGames/Wikipedia/etc. purposes. It's about GOG releases. Check out my post a few posts back.

It's things for things like Linux compatibility, and 3rd party patches that work or don't work with the GOG version of games. A forum and stickies just doesn't tend to work very well for things like that. Also some games like Evil Genius will run well, but only if you go through some fairly extensive steps to get them to work.

Wow, seems to me I wasn't the only one that likes the idea.

This is excactly what I had in mind!

For me, it doesn't have to be big or anything. It is mostly a way to permanently store important information on each game. So those don't get lost in the ebbs and tides of the forums.

As for trivia and reviews, I would suggest putting a link to Moby and Wikipedia for each game. The GOG Wiki should contain trivia and reviews that are directly linked to the GOG release of the game (eg BG 1 as first non beta release, how does the game play on modern systems, stuff like that). To be honest, I never liked those "I didn't play the GOG version, but back then it was great" reviews.

Now we have to agree on a name and then start to get things going. As for the "base wiki network" to use, I like how the Mass Effect Wiki is done. But I'm a totale noob to all those wiki thingies, so others should decide that.

so far, so good, I would say

hmm each persons suggestion makes the wiki seem more complex, perhaps we should generalize on what each game entry should have compulsory and then add the extra stuff
what i am saying basically just create a bare bones lite version of gog wiki,acquire more detail information later and agree on who does the modifications.
basically it should start from a simple version and expand based on suggestions