Arena talk:Unofficial FAQ

Compass

You are not on Earth! Why should the compass be the same as Earth's?

What the hell kind of answer is that? — Unsigned comment by 24.6.99.30 (talk) at 08:19 on 1 March 2007‎‎

Well, Tamriel is not Earth, therefore it doesn't have the same rules. Besides, East and West are arbitrary distinctions. Might as well ask why Tamriel has magicka, it's because it's not Earth. Th232 05:45, 1 March 2007 (EST)

AFAICT East and West are not reversed anyway. Alphax 18:11, 16 December 2008 (EST)

The in-game compass is correct for our world, but some NPC's will tell you to go East, when the location is actually due West and vice-versa. (Which is probably why this is even a question.) In the manual there is an image of a compass and the E is on the left and W is on the right; opposite our standard compass. Both of these together seem to indicate that the directions were possibly reversed at some early development of the game. --Satribe (talk) 07:58, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Wilderness Travel

One of my biggest questions when first checking this game out was whether I could travel between cities using the wilderness. A developer interview (I think found on the same website this FAQ is from) suggested it was possible in raw theory, but was very unlikely in practice. I don't know if it's frequently asked, however, although I do think it's somewhat important. Is it worth adding? — Unsigned comment by 77.99.30.226 (talk) at 10:24 on 29 January 2008‎

The developers of No Man's Sky gave a similar answer when asked if you could fly from one solar system to the next. "In theory yes, but no one's ever done it." - You can say; "In theory, it's possible", because in reality, you can't "disprove" it. Even if you spent the "real life" time it would take, given our limited map view and the lack of roads, the likelihood that you would succeed is ridiculously low. You couldn't prove that you were not simply off by a few miles. But when you drop the "theory" speak and take a realistic approach, the answer is "no". While we can't prove it's "impossible", we can prove that it is unrealistic to keep trying. The closest towns to each other are in High Rock and are 40km apart (25mi). Even that close you could miss it by a couple of miles and never know. However, Winterhold is right on the edge of the Sea of Ghosts. Just take a walk to the beach. I wanted to be thorough, so I walked North from Winterhold for a real life hour. That's 12 hours in-game, and no beach. It's kinda hard to miss the ocean. Also you will notice that the wilderness map still lists the current town you traveled to. That will only change when you Fast Travel to another town. Also you should be aware that if actually make it that far, it will break your game. You can save your game, but when you try to load it again, it will just lock up. (Why am I answering old questions? Because it is good information from good questions that are still being asked by new players.) --Satribe (talk) 12:10, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

My armor has negative AR values! Does this mean it makes me weaker?

Please answer. — Unsigned comment by 98.184.188.85 (talk) at 02:22 on 7 September 2009

Did I flag this correctly

Has anyone gotten both sound and music to work in xxxxx mode? (sorry for the double post)--Smallpoxx 05:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Punches freeze game?

Any idea why punching enemies is causing my game to freeze? I'm running Arena in DOSbox. Infestissumam (talk) 20:21, 3 August 2014 (GMT)

Historical interest?

Is this FAQ here mainly for historical interest, like the Daggerfall:Old Unofficial FAQ? Some of the answers here look badly out of date, but I’m not sure that there’s a point in updating it. Yellowantphil (talk) 05:15, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

There are still people who play Arena or Daggerfall from time to time, so while the FAQ's audience may be limited, it's not non-existent. If you want to update the FAQ, go right ahead; those who play it in the future will appreciate the updated information. – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 05:24, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

The FAQ was moved here due to historical interest. We don't have FAQ's for the newer games and I would support slapping a notice on the top of this page like the Daggerfall one to let people know why it is here. The information should mostly be available on more relevant pages (locations, enemies, items) and I would suggest it would be best left as it is with that same notice, as it is no longer of benefit to the namespace. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 11:56, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

It's now almost 2021 and people are still showing up here questioning why some of the information is dated or incorrect...."Me!" It seems clear that this final comment above (that this is intended as an historical document) is the de fecto consensus, but there's a problem. In it's current state, it is neither a current FAQ, nor is it an historical document. When comparing it to the version located here: UESP(2005/2011) Arena FAQ, it is clear there have been many changes. It is mostly intact, but it begs the question. Are we trying to preserve an historical document, or not? A text version of the original document can easily be found on the net, which is dated only a few days prior to the date from the 2005 page. I propose and am currently working towards the following:

1. Present and preserve the document from the 2005/2011 webpage.

2. Give credit to the author R.S. Heuman and note that this is a preservation of the 2005 web page of that information.

3. Preserve the current updates, those reflecting information about the game, in a Notes section

In actuality this will be a minimum content change, but it will clarify the intent of the page, give credit to the original, and create a space for others to add FAQ information or correction without changing the original. --Satribe (talk) 06:59, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

After reviewing the comments here and the comments for the Daggerfall: Old Unofficial FAQ and examining how it was addressed there, I decided to follow suit. After locating the original text file, I did a text comparison to the 2005 UESP site and determined they were word for word duplicates. While there were some formatting changes, the spelling and grammar were kept unchanged from the text file. At this point I found it more prudent to simply create the Historical Unofficial FAQ from the raw information allowing the current FAQ to remain unchanged and ensuring an accurate reproduction of the original, including links to the source materials. I agree with user: The Silencer (above) that most of the information "should" be available in the other pages. Unfortunately much of the information wouldn't fit well in those sections, but also wouldn't quite warrant a page of it's own. Now that both Daggerfall and Arena have their own Archived original FAQ, I suggest that the Arena FAQ continue to be updated, as is the Daggerfall FAQ, until such time the information can be dispersed properly. - (I also corrected the link to the UESP site in my previous comment.) --Satribe (talk) 08:42, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

EDIT: Modified a run-on sentence for clarity. --Satribe (talk) 00:17, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Restructure of Unofficial FAQ

Looking through the comments it appears as though this page has some conflicts. It appears that on one side, it was intended as an historical document, but many found it a helpful place to add and update the information. On the other side, because of dated information (though often still valuable) and it's structure, it discouraged many others from even attempting to add or fix anything. With the creation of the Historical Unofficial FAQ, my hope is that the desires for archival have been met and the information preserved. With a restructuring of the current Unofficial FAQ, it is my hope that it may encourage others to find a place to continue to add information, while at the same time provide a collection of information that can later be incorporated into new pages or proper current pages. --Satribe (talk) 04:52, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

END of the (modern) Unofficial FAQ

Most of the content is already in the main sections of the site. The "Historical Unofficial FAQ" provides historical representation for both the original text FAQ as well as the 2005 version on UESP. I am working towards placing any "extra" information in to the proper pages so that all of the information on this page will soon be completely redundant. I would like to announce my intention to end this page upon completion of final transfers. I will also place a post in the forums to the same effect for any feedback for my intentions. --Satribe (talk) 03:45, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

I've completed going through to ensure all the information is included in the appropriate places. One that I avoided was the very last that just seems to list some spells that are possible. This seems to lead into opinion and preference and we have comments that making your own spells is better than just the Known spell book. The information will still be included in the original FAQ and if any Spell Crafter thinks any portion is appropriate or necessary, they are free to add it. --Satribe (talk) 15:56, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Propose deletion of Arena:Historical_Unofficial_FAQ and have this page remain, but have historical FAQ copied here. I originally deleted the link to here, but it was pointed out that it isn't helpful to simply remove links to a page that still exists; and if I felt strongly that it was redundant, then I should suggest deletion. It was my intention that this page be deleted, but I see now how that might be difficult to accept as the appropriate outcome. History is involved. The "Historical Unofficial FAQ" page that I created, is simply a duplicate of the original version of this page. There are only two edits (both grammar/spelling), so I instead, suggest deleting the new page to retain the history of this original page. I went through both pages making sure to add to the wiki any information that was not yet there. All NEW information was already included on the wiki and this page will contain the original FAQ. We certainly don't need both of them. --Satribe (talk) 15:01, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

This note is to clarify why I have reached my "personal" conclusion and express what seems to "me" the logical conclusion of other options. Based on the Daggerfall solution of having a current FAQ and an Old (historical) FAQ, I decided that was the appropriate course and began the journey of recreating the historical FAQ and updating the modern FAQ. The first thing the modern FAQ needed was an orderly structure. I chose to use the WIKI as a template. But not just for Arena. I took a look at the structure of all the guides on UESP. The sections included in 3 or more game spaces have this structure; (Quest, Character, Game Play, World Info, Guides and Secrets, Technical Information, Mods & Modding, Previews and Reviews, Misc. Info, and See Also). The restuctured result was orderly, but required me to immediately add more of something that annoyed me with the FAQ; "Here's a topic: but please see the Player's Guide or WIKI for more information." ("Am I just creating a mini-wiki?") What seems the best and most oft used argument for keeping and updating a FAQ is; "Having an easily accessible and concise grouping of the most commonly used information." That's good. Sometimes I just want the minimum to get me going and I have trouble finding things on the Wiki. Other times I get frustrated with the FAQ for being so simplified I have to use the wiki anyway. I realized this is a FAQ vs WIKI struggle which includes the range from; "I only want to know 3 things" all the way to "I want to know everything". Neither FAQ's nor WIKI's will satisfy. The problem with FAQs, is there will always be disagreement on what is "essential". Unless we actually have a way to determine the answer to "What ARE the most frequently asked questions", a FAQ on a wiki site is little more than a slowly growing wiki in direct competition with the main one. However (stay with me), the problem with a wiki is I don't want to have to learn "how to use this wiki" and waste my time wading through tons of information I don't want, just to find the little answer to my "one" question. Believe it or not, that is the goal of a wiki - to be both. A way to quickly find the information you want without wading through things you don't want....but include ALL the things EVERYONE wants. If the wiki is not meeting that need for you. Please offer suggestions on how to make it better. Is there a structure that's easier to use? Do we need a FAQ style page that is more like an organized TOC, but doesn't require redundant information? Do we need to have a tables page that includes things like answers to riddles and glitches that is concise enough for a FAQ user, but can be linked to from an exhaustive walk-through? (I haven't figured out how to accomplish it yet, and keep losing the discussion page that mentions it; but consists of information on one page that is repeated through some type of anchor linking. So it appears on both pages, but is only edited on the original.) My point is to suggest we shouldn't have two competing formats, the goal should be how can we make the wiki as easy to use as a FAQ while still including "everything". My intention is to proceed in that direction, moving forward as described in my previous comment. The alternative is to revert this page back to my "restructure" edit, prior to when I began moving information off the page and into the wiki and then leave it for someone who has a grasp on "actual" frequently asked questions. --Satribe (talk) 13:15, 7 March 2021 (UTC)