Do we need this article?

I'm pretty sure Alternatives to Scratch is a better article than this one (as in, more informative). Also, this seems really informal.
Hardmath123 (talk | contribs) 14:08, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. I don't see why it's specific to "game development". And the only backlink is Quitting, which has similar problems. I vote we delete both articles (or at least this one, and redirect it to the Alternatives to Scratch article you mentioned.
Blob8108 (talk | contribs) 15:27, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
I'll delete this one in a few days if there's no-one against.
Scimonster (talk | contribs) 15:40, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
I skimmed through the two articles and I thought it would be good to merge the contents of Moving On to Alternatives to Scratch. I also checked Special:WhatLinksHere/Moving On and Special:WhatLinksHere/Alternatives to Scratch. And Alternatives to Scratch had more and better links. I suppose we could merge.
~Legobob23o (talk | contribs | sandbox) 15:57, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
I think the question is whether the content here is worth merging.
Blob8108 (talk | contribs) 16:12, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
I vote for deleting. This is very informal. It is specific to game making. It is also very demanding, telling the reader to quit Scratch if they get serious into programming, in essence.
OrcaCat (talk | contribs) 16:18, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
well, don't be harsh! I think the author had the right idea, it's just not up to our standards of quality. I would vote to extract the essence of this article and add not more than a paragraph into the alternatives page.
Hardmath123 (talk | contribs) 16:21, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, that came out a little too harsh. But the article is a bit harsh as well.
OrcaCat (talk | contribs) 16:24, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
I kind of see what you mean. It sort of looks like it's saying you have to quit Scratch to do all those things the article talks about. Plus the aim exactly is game-making. Not something like CGI animation or something like that.
~Legobob23o (talk | contribs | sandbox) 18:17, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, extracting the essence would be a good idea.
OrcaCat (talk | contribs) 02:46, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Getting back to this discussion, I agree with the general statements of this discussion: that this article is just like Alternatives to Scratch but more informal, and that it could be either deleted or merged with that page.
My opinion: The article is very informal, and it should either be deleted or have the essence of it that is actually worth merging merged into Alternatives to Scratch.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 12:55, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Comment: I looked at Alternatives to Scratch and I noticed that it may be written better, but is basically just a bunch of links with very few images. We should totally merge.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 21:46, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

This just goes on to how to use Unity3D instead of talking about moving on
Bbciplayer (talk | contribs) 23:37, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

I think shouldn't be here. The information can be moved to tehAlternative to Scratch page.
Phildude (talk | contribs) 20:17, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Why this needs to be merged

"Scratch maybe an amazing resource for learning to code, but if you are serious, then one day you need to move your game making career on."

Why are we encouraging users to quit? Not all people are on Scratch to make games. And you don't need to move on.

"It teaches several language, one of which is JavaScript. It is sometimes used in some game engines, and is quite similar in to C++, which is a favorite in the game industry."

Citation, please?

"A good game engine to start with is Unity3d"

This is biased.

Overall, this article tells nothing about moving on and instead goes over the Unity game engine and some modeling. It doesn't say where to learn Unity either. The note about 3D coordinates is really random. I appreciate the work that went into this article, but it seems way more like a blog post than a wiki article.
OrcaCat (talk | contribs) 16:09, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Looking back at this, it doesn't really contribute any relevantly valuable info. Although Alternatives to Scratch is just a couple lists, I now think that it's just about fine as it is.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 21:00, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm working on fixing it up. What it looks like to me is that it can be renamed to "Software Development", because that's more of what the article is about. The only mention of "moving on" is really the few mentioned languages. The majority of the article is on the various aspects of programming and designing software, applications, and games, which could probably merit it's own article. Any thoughts?
Turkey3 (talk | contribs) 21:47, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Well does it really have much to do with Scratch? Alternatives to Scratch, now that I think about it, is relevant to Scratch because its main duty is to relate the programs in ways that would be potable to Scratch users. This, however, is really only a tutorial on how to use OTHER languages, and doesn't really relate itself to Scratch in any way.
Mathfreak231 (talk | contribs) 00:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

I agree with OrcaCat, why are we encouraging users to quit? We definitely need to merge this
Bbciplayer (talk | contribs) 08:09, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I'll mark it for merging.
3sal2 (talk | contribs) 18:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Yes Done a while ago
3sal2 (talk | contribs) 00:42, 2 March 2014 (UTC)