The data is imperfect (not all games are on IFDB and not all IFDB pages are complete, I forgot some systems, …) but I think the overall picture is still valid.
You should probably run the search for 2021 as well but I don’t think it will change things radically.
One should not take the list of released games as benchmark. I have WIPs under Hugo, Alan 3 and TADS 2, and even Inform 5… Granted that some obviously are WIP since the turn of century, if not earlier.
In a sense we could get rid of the sentence completely, as it’s not strictly necessary where it is, and to avoid it being too long or too short – but it’s interesting information and could help someone starting to look for an authoring system.
Maybe we could go with
Some of the most commonly used, and talked about, authoring systems include:
Looking at the same systems as Nils listed above, just with the addition of ZIL and plain “Inform”, but for 2018 onwards (essentially the last five years):
P.S. I wonder whether the text ought to be updated on the IFWiki main page too. It says that Squiffy and Texture are “still going strong”. Each has five games on IFDB since 2018… though IFDB search results can’t be the sole arbiter, as PunyInform only has 11 games in that period, but is active and talked about a lot. Also, should the ZILF link be changed to ZIL?
Here’s what the main page has about authoring systems:
This has been educational. Thank you. I’ve removed the “most commonly used” sentence from Category:Authoring system (to make it more like the other software category pages), added an updated version to the Authoring system page, and at the same time updated the lists on the Main Page.
If I have made any mistakes you can register for a wiki account and fix them
Only a fraction of games end up on IFDB, and that’s doubly true of systems that have their own publishing arena. There are 200-300 games published in the Texture Public Library since 2018 and several dozen Squiffy games at textadventures.co.uk.
Oh no. I’m always worried that deleting anything from IFWiki will be heresy to someone, so I did look at https://textadventures.co.uk/squiffy and wondered whether there was more to it than met the eye. Would you be willing to register an IFWiki account and correct/update it where necessary? There is also a page on Squiffy which may interest you.
As an outsider looking in, why don’t you post a message on quest site asking for input/clarification? You could also post to the Adrift site too as they also have their own repository for games.
If you mean the figures above, it’s IFDB that must be incomplete. As it happens though, I’m sure IFWiki is even more incomplete, as from memory IFDB has about 11,000 game pages and IFWiki about 3,000.
A large chunk of what is there in IFWiki, in terms of the older games, is just full of inaccuracies and incorrect information too, when it comes to dates, systems used, authors, publishers and platforms. The whole “games released in…” group of pages are a mess, merely due to the amount of research that’s been done by bloggers and archivists in the many years since they were originally created.
IFDB is generally a lot more accurate, although there are still plenty of issues with the facts about older, pre-2000 games and there are duplicate entries for games.
