Talk:List of freeware video games

This alphabetical index of Wikipedia articles falls within the scope of the WikiProject Indexes. This is a collaborative effort to create, maintain, and improve alphabetical indexes on Wikipedia.IndexesWikipedia:WikiProject IndexesTemplate:WikiProject IndexesIndexes articles

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

[untitled]

213.169.25.131 removed a lot of entries. Revert?

Jep, 213.169.25.131's definition of "proper freeware" is not supported in freeware-article, which says: "Freeware is computer software which is made available gratis/free of charge." Redistributability is not obligatory. --Mikko Paananen 18:04, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Well... Can we reinclude them in their own section as "not freeware but released for free?"

Thats called shareware --E-Magination 15:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not necessarily. GTA 1 and 2 were released for free by Rockstar, but they are not redistributable, they may only be downloaded from their page. In the broad definition the Freeware article uses, they are freeware. If we used a stricter definition, they would not be (and they would be "not freeware but released for free"). In any event, they are not shareware.Sega381 16:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Chase

The top section of the article states "Games that require a donation or fee, have nag screens, or require purchase for play time, game items, new content or features are shareware, and are not included in this list." Then, in the Gameplay section of Grand Chase's wiki article, one sees: "The game is free-to-play, but there are some items that can only be purchased with real-world currency." Shall I delete it? --207.216.210.189 (talk) 14:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC) There are other games like that. Well, at least there is Battlefield Heroes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.207.190.132 (talk) 11:18, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links

Can someone please try to find and add external links to those games that doesn't have its own Wiki-page?

I have added several freeware games but they keep getting removed. The games I added are completely free freeware. I don't understand why someone keep removing them. Is this not a wiki page and open for edit by anyone following the description of the page? The games don't have their own wiki page, so the links go directly to the game's developer site. Can someone tell me what the problem is with adding games to this page? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.210.94.42 (talk) 18:35, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Freware Is Alive! has a collection of over 75 freeware games including screenshots and the link is: http://freewareisalive.18.forumer.com/ Most of the games there do not have their own Wikipedia page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.142.201 (talk) 02:06, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There should be an area within discussion or the main article for freeware game links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.142.201 (talk) 02:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alphabetic order

Please remember to keep the external links in alphabetic order when you add/remove links.

GTA

GTA is not freeware. It is distributed freely by rockstar games but can be downloaded solely through their website. Rockstar games themselves clearly state that it is not freeware:

"PLEASE NOTE that while this game may be downloaded for free by all who register by filling out the form on this page, it is NOT freeware and may not be mirrored or duplicated by any third parties without express written consent from Rockstar Games."

(www.rockstargames.com/classics)

So why have you re-added it to the list Nifboy?

Sapienza

GTA 1 and 2 were released for free by Rockstar, but they are not redistributable, they may only be downloaded from their page. In the broad definition the Freeware article uses, they are freeware, as they are avaliable fully and free of charge. If we used a stricter definition, they would not be (and they would be "not freeware but released for free"). In their page, Rockstare uses the stricter Freeware definition. In the article and list, the general definition is used. Sega381 16:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Rockstar Games themselves don't know the difference between freeware, public domain and open source software. Their game is definitely freeware. This term simply means you're allowed to download the full version for free. Public domain and open source (or even creative commons) are a bit different in their definitions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.253.186.62 (talk) 09:46, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nethack

Nethack is not freeware. It's free software.

right, i remove it. --Dafuchs 10:49, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Slight POV problems in game descriptions?

I've noticed that there are several game descriptions that claim the game in question is "so good it got the creator a job" or "one of the best" or something along those lines. Should these be changed to make this list more NPOV? -Nmarchan

Rise of the Dragon

Does anybody have any references for Rise of the Dragon being freeware? I didn't find any, not even in the game's own article. I was suprised to see it here and normally would have removed it, but seeing that it has been on the list for more than 20 months I thought I'd better ask first. --Anym 17:07, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks more like abandonware to me, just like SimCity first of the name. As its publishers seem not to care about it anymore, I think it'd be safe to remove it. Unless others say otherwise ?

I say we create another list/article documenting abandonwares (games who are not sold/distributed anymore and whose creators have "forsaken", and are legitimately distributable if no profit is made) -- Omega Said 22:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abandonware is not legitimately distributable. The concept of abandonware is not supported by law. In U.S. law copyrighted material is copyrighted to the owner for 70 years upon the date the copyright was issued. So even if they no longer sell the product the copyright is still in effect, and is legally protected by the law.69.225.9.90

Limits

I see a lot of unpopular games without an article, solely here for advertising. Should I remove them?--E-Magination 15:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the list needed a cleanup. Some of the former propietary games that are now freeware need an article, and I think those shouldn't be deleted. But I'm not so sure about removing the information on former freeware games...Sega381 16:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

I do not have time to do an exhaustive check right now, but many of the games on this page are probably not notable. Someone should go through and check. Andre (talk) 02:20, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much, DUH!. --=='''[[User:E-Magination''' ==]] 09:29, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Card-Ware Game

I just want to recommend a game for this article. Ancient Domains Of Mystery (ADOM). A very extensive text based game similar to nethack. 75.80.231.31 06:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding External Link - Freeware Forum

Dear all,

I would like to add a link here to a great freeware forum called CWF that has a growing community of dedicated gamers and was set up for as collection of links to freeware games and the discussion of games, to discuss commercial games and other things. Here is the link:

http://forum.connect-webdesign.dk/index.php

I did not want to add it without approval here first.

Thanks,

Parvini

Not approved.--=='''[[User:E-Magination''' ==]] 11:32, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's good to see people ask before add their site, very good manner. Too bad, it's forum and against WP:EL. So I'm afraid it won't fit in article. L-Zwei 11:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to figure out where this break the rules. Since I am the owner and one part of the administrator team of afore mentioned site, I would love it if we could get featured on Wikipedia. The link goes to the forum only because the main site had no real design for it yet. It is still in development and we are getting more involved in the making of the games now too. We plan to help developers in general get their games done through both helping the development hands on, or by financing future developments. If the site is not yet suitable for getting mentioned in this section I would appreciate it if we were allowed by you to mention our site once more later on when we find it to be more done than it is present. As said before it would be an honour to get mentioned on Wiki in this section.

Highests regards and best wishes from Christian Toft

Free To Play & Shareware Games

A lot of the games here are Free to play, meaning you can play for free, but you can pay money to unlock exclusive stuff. Shouldn't that stuff be removed? Most of the things here are free games, not freeware games. User:phbbt107

I have noticed alot of the games on here are "Free-to-play" games, that have aditional features that you can purchase for real money (e.g. Maple story and FlyFF), but wouldn't that techincly make them shareware? Mattyatty 16:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you may remove them.--=='''[[User:E-Magination''' ==]] 18:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, remove them. --W3stfa11 22:11, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and removed a bunch of free-to-play games. If someone could go and check if I missed any, that'd be great. --Lijnema 19:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

structure

I think it would be better if these were arranged by genres, don't you think? --W3stfa11 22:11, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with you. When I'm looking for games, I never start searching at A, but I almost always look for games in a certain genre. Re-structuring the games by genre would be great.

The Zeroorez

F.E.A.R. Combat

Is there a reason for FEAR Combat not being included? On the 17th of August 2006 the multiplayer version of FEAR went freeware. Also see: First_Encounter_Assault_Recon#Multiplayer, List_of_commercial_games_released_as_freeware and List_of_free_first-person_shooters#F.E.A.R_Combat The Zeroorez

Open Source vs. Freeware

Despite how the introduction states that open source games should go in the separate list dedicated to them, I spotted 3 open source games within minutes of skimming thru the entry. "Apophis" was even called an open source game in the description, right next to the link! (I've removed the erroneous entries that I've spotted.) Clearly, contributors are missing the distinction between the two lists. Understandable, I suppose, since the sentence that says open source games ought to go in the other list isn't particularly conspicuous. While we can, and should, go thru the list sooner or later to prune out the duplicate open source entries (making sure that they're placed on the open source list), I think that we should erect a prominent banner to prevent such problems in the future, or a similar measure. Thoughts? -Mysterius 06:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not too interested in the debate, but I think the argument is that any game that is available for free is freeware, and this thus makes "freeware" a superset which includes all free software (aka open source) packages. --Gronky 08:17, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I've seen a number of games dropped from the Open Source list, because the game contained non-free content, and not added to this list. I think it would be best to have all free games in this list, open source and not. --Lijnema 17:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not in any way against that, but the introduction should be edited, then, to reflect consensus. And if/when such a consensus is reached, then my previous deletions should be re-added to the list. -Mysterius 00:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, let's list the lot, making a note of which are open source. While we're at it, let's do something other than alphabetical order; categories can do that; perhaps by-genre, by-license, or by original release date? Marasmusine 06:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And let's also split the list in two: packages that are free software but which use non-free level data, maps, images, etc., and packages that are entirely free software and free content. --Gronky 07:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As long as we don't start listing each individual Doom source port in that latter section. Marasmusine 15:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Lumping treating "freeware" as an umbrella term under which to place "free software" is mistaken, overlooking the history of the term freeware, how Wikipedia describes it, etc. Please don't conflate terms here. D. Brodale 20:12, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Dhunters1.jpg

The image Image:Dhunters1.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:16, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New link for freeware? or is it just free software... you people confuse me.

I'm not all that familiar with the term "freeware" vs. "free software", so, i'm going to leave it up to someone who actually understands that to post this link in the appropriate section. http://freeware.remakes.org/

thanks(and i'm not logged in. dang.) XIADEN74.77.105.188 (talk) 22:35, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Battle For Wesnoth - Free Software But Not Freeware?

Around 26/27-May-08 the following entry was deleted by Ciastek on the grounds that it is free software but not freeware:

Battle for Wesnoth is a turn-based strategy/RPG game with a fantasy theme.

I don't understand the difference between free software and freeware. Please explain. John259 (talk) 06:37, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion

I've nominated this for deletion, if there is a reason you feel it should not be deleted (or if you agree that it should be), please discuss here, thanks. <3 bunny 02:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The individual articles on the games provide extremely useful information. Therefore this and similar lists of links to articles also provide extremely useful information and should be retained. However, there's a need to sort out whether the distinction between the terms free software and freeware is pedantry or justified. Just my opinion, obviously. John259 (talk) 06:28, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You put emphasis on "extremely useful information" but you do not define what "extremely useful information" is and you do not prove that the links are so. Plus, a page with links to "extremely useful stuff" does not constitute a good article (and this page is classified as a stub accordingly), and it does not mean that it is reason for it to be kept. An IP user has removed my prod, without what I think is sound reason, stating: "I have removed the proposal for deletion. This page contains a list of worthwhile games for those who are new to the freeware gaming scene to try out, there is no serious reason for it to be deleted[... sic]"; however, Wikipedia is not a directory per WP:NOTDIRECTORY#DIRECTORY. Comments? <3 bunny 02:49, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see Wikipedia's role as that of providing useful and reliable information, not engaging in pointless pedantry. In my opinion no purpose would be served in deleting the page and such an action would only be harmful. John259 (talk) 07:25, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. So you wonder what criteria we have to include games in the list, and how we avoid adversiting. I think things have worked well so far. Can you explain in what way you think it's failing? --Lijnema (talk) 12:48, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Every entries need to has article here, whenever red link entry added (or its article got deleted), editors will remove it. This mean each entry is at least notable enough to has article here, this list is place to collect them like index. That's why it's useful. L-Zwei (talk) 14:47, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a list of Wikipedia articles, used for navigational purposes, complementing Category:Freeware games. See WP:Lists#Navigation. This is quite different to a directory, which is why we are constantly snipping out external links. Marasmusine (talk) 16:25, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Duplication between this and List of commercial games released as freeware

As I understand it, this and the commercial game freeware list are mutually exclusive. However, some games appear on both lists. I removed ZZT from this list, since it was shareware before it was freeware. However, SubSpace also appears on both lists, but I do not know anything about the game, so I can't really say which list it belongs on. --Thunderbird8 (talk) 17:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why not flash games, or at least notable ones

There are some great flash games out there that are completely free to play. Some of the flash games have had more plays by individual users than some Playstation games. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.194.193.194 (talk) 23:57, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They should be notable enough to have an own article and then it would be good idea for an article List of free Browser games or something (not only Flash). --12:52, 9 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.221.74.155 (talk)

Clarity, and a bit of housekeeping

Removed the C and C entry and played a bit with the article's writing. It's not totally proper english, but I feel the open source and commercial-as-freeware lists need the whitespace so idiots can see them... I missed it the first time and almost started putting all the open source games I liked onto the list. >_>

as to the flash games thing, maybe make a article/list for those? People look for it so I suppose a compiled list would be useful. Given how fast flash games develop though, it might be a liiiiitle more trouble than one might want.

142.59.56.26 (talk) 05:03, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Online games and freeware

I think we should be clear that freeware doesn't include client-server model online games, unless the server software itself is also available as freeware. This will filter out most "free-to-play" MMO games. Marasmusine (talk) 15:03, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why shouldn't you guys add http://alldownloads4less.t83.net to the list of external sites. It's a great site for freeware games —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.210.5.211 (talk) 11:56, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We're not a web directory. Marasmusine (talk) 15:51, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rename

Anyone think renaming to "List of notable freeware video games" would be more accurate? 71.169.130.75 (talk) 17:25, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

deleted duplicates with List of open source games

I have deleted the following games from this list. Some of these have restricted licenses for content, but the other page currently accepts that.

Allegiance Angband AssaultCube Bitfighter Battle for Wesnoth BZFlag C-evo Enigma Frets on Fire Frozen Bubble Nexuiz TORCS Torus Trooper Tremulous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.85.42.110 (talk) 20:19, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some Content has been removed

I have removed a few games from the list because they does not fit the criteria of "closed source" Freeware games as stated at the top of the page. These games include:
- Simutrans
- Slingshot
- Spring project
- Star Wars Tactics
- Stepmania
- Wormux

If you feel one (or more) of the games should not have be deleted, please discuss here. Thanks.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by DeltaSpeeds (talk • contribs) 19:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of adding 'this should be moved' to a handful of things on the list, it would be better form to just be bold and move them. -- Jelly Soup (talk) 20:46, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Elder Scrolls

Should the first two games (Arena and Daggerfall) be listed? They originally were not free however Bethesda has been giving the first away for free on their site for years and daggerfall since 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.204.135.150 (talk) 21:04, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Filter by game genre?

Could someone modify this page so that one could sort through all listed games by their genre? This page has things done that way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open-source_video_games

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.119.217.157 (talk) 17:12, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nitronic Rush?

There is a game called Nitronic Rush that you can download and play for free. Should this game be listed?

Whilst we don't list every freeware game that exists, Nitronic Rush has had some coverage in a few places. If you want to list it, I suggest citing Ars Technica which is a reliable source. Marasmusine (talk) 12:53, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Problems in "F" category

I removed FlightGear as that's definitely open source^[1], therefore it doesn't belong here. What about flOw, though. Being a Flash game, doesn't that put it in the not-included browser game bracket? OrbiterSpacethingy (talk) 17:25, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

^ [1]

table

this page has a list, the open-source page has a table and the 'commercial released as free' page has another kind of table; I feel they should all be tables, and be around the same type of table. I prefer the one on the 'commercial released as free' page. of course, on the open-source list there needs to be a column for licences but otherwise I think that certain information such as the platform is needed 189.78.163.65 (talk) 05:56, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from List of free PC titles

List of free PC titles duplicates this page, both in scope and mostly in content. I think it's fairly obvious that the newer duplicate needs to be merged into this one, and I have tagged both pages accordingly. If someone wants to, they probably could just tag the duplicate page for speedy deletion, but I did note a few titles from the duplicate page that were apparently not listed here. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:53, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, that wouldn't work. List of free PC titles has incompatible content with this list (as well as vice versa). This list contains non-PC games that are only freeware. List of free PC titles contains free-to-play titles, which are not freeware. The information on this list is brand new and still undergoing construction. Give the new list a couple more weeks to mature and demonstrate its differences before proposing merges with other lists. Wikinium (talk) 00:00, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- It's pointless to have two lists of freeware video games. We can create a list of free-to-play online games if there isn't one already, but the other list can not duplicate this one. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:10, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Again, this is platform-specific list that includes all types of free games. Whether this be online or singleplayer, open-source, free, free-to-play, etc. This list just isn't compatible with the one you decided it needed to be merged with. There is some information that could go in both, but why does this mean you need to destroy a perfectly legitimate list? IF you're interested in growing this list, that's fine, but you don't need to kill the PC one to get the data out of it that you want. Wikinium (talk) 01:16, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I alerted WikiProject Video Games and gave a pointer to this discussion. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:44, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GROW (series)

Shouldn't the GROW series not be included on this list, since they are flash games and not "traditional executable files that must be downloaded and installed"?

TheWizardG (talk) 17:32, 30 April 2015 (UTC)TheWizardG[reply]

Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Phantoms is not freeware!

According to its Wikipedia article, it has over $1,000 worth of paid DLC available. TheWizardG (talk) 18:43, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of freeware video games. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150929015808/http://magestorm.org/ to http://www.magestorm.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:04, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Charityware / Careware

Is charityware considered freeware? Donationware says that it's a type of freeware. Whisperjanes (talk) 19:24, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone add Eversion please?

Eversion is a 2008 freeware puzzle platformer with a Lovecraftian twist. Downloads are at archive.org when you search "eversion freeware" on browsers. I think it fits on this page and would be a cool addition. 186.172.42.64 (talk) 19:29, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:00, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[FlightGear_about_page-1] [1]

[1]