I understand we permit 'identify this game',
I'm not happy with any non-technology-related questions in general(*1) and gaming especially. After all, this is Retro-COMPUTING, not Retro-GAMING.
But I also see that this community does have some deep knowledge about games. We all had (or still have) our joystick-waggling days (*2). Bottom line, I can see some reasoning, but I do not have to like it.
but surely that means presenting something more concrete about the game that is to be identified?
Good point. Some my have noticed my habit of asking for more information, in such cases and, if additional information is given in comments, redirecting them to update the question instead. Works sometimes, but less often than desired. Quite a few get obviously abandoned, like if it was just a quick post without any interest in following up, essentially wasting everyone's time.
Worse are those presented with an attitude of entitlement to an answer. A behaviour which seems to me notable more common with game questions than with any other type of question.
So if we continue to accept identify random game (*3), we need to employ common sense if the data provided is sufficient and vote for closing as "needing details or clarity", which is - unlike some assume - not a punishment but basic procedure. I will continue doing so. In contrast, I will not go for immediate down-voting, as there should be time to react and improve a question. Only if that doesn't happen in any way, should a question also be down-voted for "unclear or not useful".
Even if some answer is magically elicited,
it seems like a dead end for the forum. Is anyone else likely to find the answer useful?
That's a general issue with all 'identify-this' questions - and in fact many others as well. After all, what good is a question about cartridge slot cost why a certain decision was made with the C64 memory mapping?
What especially the last one shows (by a high access count) is that useless knowledge is liked when it's about some topic linked to one's own past (*5). And that's what 'Identify-Game' questions can bring: the great moment of remembering that particular game when reading the answer. Nothing ground-shaking, but definitively lighting up the day.
Long story short:
- I don't like them,
- I don't want them, but
- I can see a benefit for the site if kept in line, thus
- they need to be tight regulated.
*1 - With the exception of History questions.
*2 - Heck, I still put my left hand automatic over WASD when it's about fast reaction, even with web-based purely mouse controlled games. It's deeply engraved in my muscle memory.
*3 - Which I still would like to differentiate from 'Identify Random Arcade Game', which IMHO has no place here.
*4 - Had to look that word up. Like it :))
*5 - Assuming that most hits come from people who had or still have a C64, being fond of everything related.