Wolfenstein 2009 pc demo free download

Teen Agent[edit]

Should "Teen Agent" and "Drascula: The Vampire Strikes Back" be included?. Lmcgregoruk (talk) , 9 May (UTC)

After a quick look, yes if they have articles (talk) , 16 May (UTC)

Disputed freeware download links[edit]

I've removed these to here for discussion. Without some sort of proof, I'd argue that the guy hosting the below links doesn't have permission to be doing so. Just because something was being distributed by the creator/copyright holder does not necessarily mean that offering them on your own is OK.

At least the Zorks I-III include a licence notice from Activision, which forbids copying the games. Evktalo , 12 Jan (UTC)

The games Betrayal at Krondor, Caesar, and Red Baron are not free downloads. This was confirmed by Liberated Games in November Furthermore, Ultima 0 and Ultima IV are ambiguous, at best.

Yes.. I'm not sure if the list belongs in the Abandonware page at all - if the games are supported with a download or a freeware licence, they are hardly abandonded. evktalo , 24 Jan (UTC)

Both the Oldware (French site) and replacementdocs engage in copyright infringement. My vote would be to remove those links, but I would prefer not engage in that practice myself since my own site (Liberated Games) is listed. (Note: Liberated Games tries to stay clean in the sense of listing sites only if confirmation from a copyright holder can be obtained.)

Actually - Some of the games listed were availble for free for a short time. However, not anymore. Ultima IV, I believe, is only allowed to be distributed by one website for free. , 15 July (UTC)

iD Software Games[edit]

Shouldn't iD Software games like Doom and Quake be on the list here? Or does being opensourced mean it's not abandonware? Jacoplane , 13 December (UTC)

Read a few lines above..&#;;) Only their source has been released. The game data has not. evktalo , 16 December (UTC)

Descent: Freespace[edit]

What about Descent: Freespace game? --Varnav , 14 June (UTC)

Source only. [1]evktalo , 15 June (UTC)

Freespace2 which is on the list is not freeware. It is source only also. Wjmurdick (talk) , 2 June (UTC)

Rockstar Games[edit]

Rockstar has released GTA, GTA2, and Wild Metal for free. I'm pretty sure these count

www.cronistalascolonias.com.ar --Chris Price , 30 July (UTC)

I see Wild Metal on there after more checking, but GTA and GTA2 still aren't --Chris Price , 30 July (UTC)

See Talk:Abandonware#Public domain vs freeware. , 31 July (UTC)

Granted, but still, either Wild Metal should not be on the list, or GTA and GTA2 should be added. Having one of the three listed makes no sense at all. --Chris Price , 3 August (UTC)

MechCommander Series[edit]

The MechCommander series have not been released as freeware, the site www.cronistalascolonias.com.ar is offering pirate copies of the isos via torrent. Microsoft have released the source code for MC2 which the owners of www.cronistalascolonias.com.ar appear to equate with being the same thing as the entire game being released as freeware.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Deepcut (talk • contribs) .

That appears to be correct even more, ONLY MC2 source code has been released (and I'm not sure about the graphics data), I haven't found references on the rest of the series Releasing one game's source code clearly doesn't affect the rest of the series. Even if the entire game was open source, it doesn't belong in this list. Removed the links to the illegal downloads site from the articles www.cronistalascolonias.com.ar , 8 October (UTC)

True, no place here, even if the Soure code download packet from Microsoft includes a compiled version of the game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) , 25 September (UTC)

Web directory?[edit]

This page reads like a Web directory, more than an encyclopedic article. Are there other Wikis this page could be moved to and maintained there? , 19 October (UTC)

There could be another article, but I haven't found one where this list fits well. However, it might be a good idea to remove the "Get it here" links; I'm not sure they really belong there in the first placeSega , 19 October (UTC)

Removed the links; they are at each article's page anyway. Shoule be less web-directory like www.cronistalascolonias.com.ar , 21 October (UTC)

Addition[edit]

Jefffire , 28 November (UTC)

Never mind, it goes under open-souce now. Jefffire , 28 November (UTC)

Yes, it should. I have added it under its correct title Star Control II. -- Darklock (talk) , 23 March (UTC)

Factor 5 Amiga games[edit]

I've just notice factor 5 have their ports of r-type and bonks adventure aswell a katakis along with backup versions of the first three turrican games. so what part of the list should these be put in. linkAtirage , 21 January (UTC)

F.E.A.R.'s multiplayer component[edit]

Is this one worth mentioning? Wouldn't this just be viewed as a patch since the single player game is necessary to play it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Messatsu (talk • contribs) , 27 January (UTC).

I haven't played the game, but as I understood, the multiplayer version of FEAR was available as a free download, and so it was playable without the original FEAR game. It's included in the original game; it's not a patch for the retail version (at least that's what is said in the FEAR article).Sega , 27 January (UTC)

It's actually called Fear Combat and it is a free download you can get from the fear site itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) , 2 September (UTC)

See Also[edit]

Why "MUD" in the "see also" section? Palpalpalpal , 2 March (UTC)

Good question I think it was left over from when this list was part of another article. Link www.cronistalascolonias.com.ar , 2 March (UTC)

A lot more[edit]

There are a lot of publishers and individuals who have given permission for their old titles to be freely distrubuted. // Liftarn

The original BattleChess (for DOS) from should be included. In fact it was one of the first "liberated" games ever, in Quote from the file_www.cronistalascolonias.com.ar that was included in magazine publications and downloads at that time: "[] With the advent of BATTLE CHESS II(tm) last year, we launched what is perhaps the most intriguing style of chess play since this, the original BATTLE CHESS swept the computer gaming world in As our way of saying thanks, we are setting BATTLE CHESS loose upon the world as FREEware! Yes, that's right - FREEWARE. []"

Was Battle Chess released as freeware? Doing a google search I can find many sites offering it for download as such, but I can find no statement from a publisher or anyone else stating so. Neither the Battle Chess nor the Interplay wiki pages mention the game being available as freeware, and while the Interplay website does list the game and have a demo available under technical support, they do not provide any information about either its current commercial/freeware status or how to obtain it in either case. The comment above would suggest the freeware version was originally released through magazine compilations, though I would feel better about it if I could actually see some statement that the game was indeed released as freeware, and not merely abandoned and for some reason assumed to be so. -- Shaun Hamman (talk) , 16 April (UTC)

In , someone asked Interplay about the status of the original Battle Chess. An Interplay employee replied, "It's possible that it was released as Freeware, but unlikely," and then goes on to state that the game is for sale on www.cronistalascolonias.com.ar Here's a link to the full exchange.

It seems to me that even if Battle Chess was released as freeware back in , the fact that Interplay doesn't currently acknowledge it as being freeware (and still sells it) implies that it should not be regarded as currently freeware. (Releasing a game as freeware isn't the same as committing the game to the public domain, which entails a renunciation of copyright. In other words, Interplay always retained the copyright to Battle Chess and thus retains the right to recategorize a game previously re-released as freeware as a commercially sold product once again.) Thus I would vote to remove Battle Chess from the list unless evidence can be produced that Interplay has recently acknowledged Battle Chess to be (still) freeware. --Mike Agricola (talk) , 6 June (UTC)

Page organization[edit]

Suggesting anti-chronological original release sorting for game list instead of alphabet name sorting. Because for video games, year of release is strongly linked to technologies SW & HW. Would looks like nicer and easier to browse like this:

• - FPS - FEAR combat
• - RPG - []
• - FPS - []

It sounds like a good idea, it may be a better organization however, most lists I've seen are ordered alphabetically is there any Wikipedia rule or recommendation on this? What do everyone else think? Sega , 9 April (UTC)

I don't really see a problem with the alphabetical ordering. The list isn't there for people to quickly find a free game to play, it's not a free games portal, it's a list of games which at one point weren't freeware but were release as such at a later date. Having said that, I am not strongly opposed to a re-ordering, and if more people want it, that's fine I guess. However, if someone is going to make the list chronological, it should be going from oldest to newest, as per this guideline, and not in reverse order. And I don't think the type of game should come before the name of the game, that just makes no sense at all. --Lijnema , 9 April (UTC)

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy[edit]

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (computer game) is available for free as a java applet online on Douglas Adam's website. Does this make it some sort of freeware? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) , 14 May (UTC)

Warzone [edit]

I saw Warzone in this list Warzone was Open Source'ed, not Freeware'ed and the Open Source version has most of the game content (short of the cutscenes). I will not alter this as perhaps I don't know something. But I would strongly advise that someone else does. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) , 22 May (UTC)

You're right, and it's alreay in the List of open source games article, so it's been removed. Sega (talk) , 23 May (UTC)

TrackMania[edit]

TrackMania Nations ESWC & TrackMania Nations is Free www.cronistalascolonias.com.ar?lang=en&rub=downloads—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) , 1 June (UTC)

TrackMania Nations is a seperate freeware title, not a previously sold game. Deepcut (talk) , 15 September (UTC)

NetStorm not free[edit]

I don't think NetStorm is free. The disclaimer in the freely downloadable game is "NSHQ would like to inform you that Activision Inc. holds the sole legal rights to Netstorm:Islands at war. All logo's and software on this site are being distributed as abandonware and are trademarks of their respective owners. NSHQ thus accepts NO responsibility for any legal ramifications you may incur by use of the said material. By Downloading/Installing any material of NSHQ you affirm the above statement to be true and acceptable. - The Management".

Another source

This looks like abandonware, and not freeware. I remove it from the list. (talk) , 13 August (UTC)

Race into space[edit]

Buzz Aldrin's race into space was released as freeware. Probably. See [[2]]. Is it OK to include BARIS to the list?

Someone adapted original source, so the game is using SDL [[3]] . —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) , 16 September (UTC)

It should be OK to include it, the original developers -holding the copyright as per their contract with Interplay- have granted free non-commercial distribution as per the link you provided. I tried to put it in, but the XLinkBot came by and axed it again (probably for good reason, I won't debate that). If someone feels like resurrecting or fixing my edit, probably making the external link an actual reference in the article, by all means, please do. (talk) , 22 October (UTC)

Ad-ware freeware[edit]

Should Ad-ware be listed here? Is it really freeware if it has ads? Also is a program freeware when one is blocked from playing it because the player is located outside the United States? [examples Rise and Fall, Area 51, etc.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) , 15 November (UTC)

According to Freeware, freeware is something that is available at no cost. So they should be there. (talk) , 19 May (UTC)

If 'freeware' is available at no cost, that presumably excludes adware - but I went to the Wikipedia entry and it makes clear in its introduction that freeware is "available for use at no monetary cost", which suggests that adware is therefore included. However, section 3 of the Freeware Wikipedia entry details a number of restrictions. It opens by stating "Freeware cannot economically rely on commercial promotion". I think it is safe to say that adware is very much reliant on commercial promotion, and so should not be included in this article.

It appears that there needs to be some reconsideration of what 'freeware' actually means - and if the term should even be used. There seems to be a lot of confusion, including on the Wikipedia entry for the www.cronistalascolonias.com.arosity (talk) , 6 November (UTC)

NON-FREELY REDISTRIBUTABLE[edit]

What the hell is this all about? The right to distribution is per the license agreement, the EULA, I don't think it is at all necessary to list every little deal of the license agreement on this list. After all this is not a "list of distributable games", it's a "list of commercial games released as freeware", can we try and keep it that way? Otherwise we're gonna need a table. --Hm2k (talk) , 16 December (UTC)

PC World article[edit]

I see LegitimateAndEvenCompelling has already linked to the PC World article, above, but I just wanted to give everyone who worked on this article a "well done" for helping make it "convenient and verifiable". Wouldn't it be great if we turned it into a sortable list? Marasmusine (talk) , 5 January (UTC)

Agreed, and let's remember Jimbo Wales set up Wikipedia and directly or indirectly the rules such as WP:RS that make this page "convenient and verifiable." --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) , 5 January (UTC)

Can Add-ons be listed as freewares&#;?[edit]

The entry Antheads: It Came From The Desert 2 was added by , then deleted by Sega for lack of related article. It seems that the said game is referenced in the article It Came From The Desert. However, this article mentions that Antheads is only an add-on. Should it be listed on its own, or as a sub-entry for It Came From the Desert, or not at all&#;? PS&#;: whatever the answer is, I'm obviously too limited in english to modify this page&#;;) . --gabknight (talk) , 9 January

I think there is no problem with comercial expansion packs that were re-released as freeware. In this case, the problem was that the link was pointing to a non-existent article, when it should have been poiting to the section in the "It Came From The Desert" page. I'll re-add it with the correct link. --Sega (talk) , 10 January (UTC)

Geographical restrictions (inc. the briefly-free Ubisoft games)[edit]

Specifically, Far Cry, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time and Rayman Raving Rabbids. Weren't the free ad-supported downloads of these also restricted to the US? I have a vague memory of trying to get hold of Far Cry in this way and being frustrated because I wasn't in the US. If so, that should be mentioned. Loganberry (Talk) , 17 March (UTC)

And while I'm on the subject Rise and Fall: Civilizations at War, from the main list, is apparently only playable to people with a US IP address. It is therefore not a free game to the vast majority of the world. Geographical restrictions definitely need to be mentioned unless this article is going to be retitled List of commercial games released as freeware in the United States! Loganberry (Talk) , 17 March (UTC)

By all means, feel free to mark them as geographically restrictedSega (talk) , 18 March (UTC)

Thanks; I'll do so where I can get sources. Loganberry (Talk) , 18 March (UTC)

which is proving pretty difficult, actually, as most of the places offering the game (Raf:CaW) are US-based for a US audience, and thus don't mention the restrictions at all. There are quite a few irritable posts from non-Americans in the comments, but those don't constitute reliable sources. Loganberry (Talk) , 18 March (UTC)

Games starting with the word "The"[edit]

I think it is misleading to put them in T. What do you guys think? (talk) , 30 April (UTC)

Throughout history, "the" has been ignored when sorting lists, I bet there's even mention of it in a wikipedia article somewhere --Hm2k (talk) , 30 April (UTC)

Tables for this article?[edit]

About every other game related lists have tables. Why not here too? (talk) , 19 May (UTC)

If you feel it would improve the article, go ahead. --Sega (talk) , 20 May (UTC)

The Adventures of Fatman[edit]

Why was The Adventures of Fatman removed from the list? The original is freeware according to its wikipedia article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) , 24 May (UTC)

It's a good question. However, I can't find a reference in the Wikipedia article which confirms that the game is actually freeware. The company's website is a little outdated, and only mentions a commercial re-release, after the mentioned freeware date. I think that if someone can find a reliable reference on the status of the game, we can re-add it. --Sega (talk) , 24 May (UTC)

Conquest Series and Dark Sun Series[edit]

Conquest of Camelot and Conquest of the Longbox. Before we play Ping-Pong by removing and adding these games again and again, can the person who removed them tell me why? They are for download on the site of the developers. See the Wikipedia entries of these games and follow the links at the end. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) , 2 June (UTC)

I'm not the one who removed the games, but I have an idea of why they were removed. There is no reliable source confirming that those two games have been re-released as freeware. They are avaliable at the original developer's site, but she is no longer working for the company that developed them, Sierra. I'm guessing that Sierra holds the copyright, not one of the people that developed it. Therefore, the author may have released them in "good faith", some kind of abandonware allowed by the author. But if Sierra holds the copyright, legally the games are not freeware, and the author putting them online is legally (though maybe not morally) wrong.

I could also be wrong. If there is proof somewhere that the copyright holder of the games re-relased them as freeware (that is, if Christie Marx holds the copyrights, or if Sierra allowed her to re-release them as freeware), we should re-add them to the listSega (talk) , 5 June (UTC)

Thank you very much for the answer. I havn't found any other source than wikipedia and Christy Marx' site. Neither liberated games, nor any other freeware site seems to list them. Strange Situation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) , 8 June (UTC)

Then the most likely situation is that Sierra holds the copyright for those games, but they haven't re-released them as freeware, and aren't selling them at all for now. Christy Marx probably had requests for the games, and as currently they can't be bought anywhere, she put them up (or at least a version of the games she had) on her website. Though that is nice, legally Sierra probably holds the rights, so they could force Christy to remove the game copies from her site (if Sierra cared enough about those games). I think that is the current situation. In fact, the link to the download page for the games should be removed from the game's Wikipedia article as well. Sega (talk) , 8 June (UTC)

I understand. I also was the guy who added the two Dark Sun games. I think there is the same Situation with these two games but i am not sure. There is no copyright info regarding these games on the website. But the programmer has at least the permission to re-develop Dark Sun online so he must have been in contact with the copyright-holders. Slightly OT but i also added Iron Seed. The

designers who realeased the game as freeware were the publishers as well and so they know what they are doing. At least some members of the forum have access to the source code because there are new updates to the game. Sadly they don't realease the source under GPL.

Beyond Castle Wolfenstein[edit]

Hi, Does anyone have a source for BCW being released as freeware? Thanks --The Fifth Horseman (talk) , 21 July (UTC)

From www.cronistalascolonias.com.ar

"Q) Do you have the rights to distribute this game?

A) Hopefully!

Silas Warner's wife has granted permission to release the source code and game executables as a small memorial of his work."Calvero2 (talk) , 22 July (UTC)

Orbiter[edit]

As far as I know, Orbiter was never a commercial game and therefore shouldn't be listed here however I don't know about the early days of the game. Clarification anyone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) , 16 July (UTC)

Command & Conquer games[edit]

C&C games are no longer available for download; as far as I know they are provided for sale again. They should be deleted from the list and moved to the second section of the article. (talk) , 5 March (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the C&C games officially released as freeware are still available for download. Via a bit of searching, I discovered that Command & Conquer (video game)#Released as freeware provides a link to one C&C freeware game hosted on the EA server, so that's clearly an authorized download. I also found another link to the freeware C&C Red Alert hosted on the EA server via the official C&C forum.

As for the games being sold, my understanding is that EA is selling a compilation entitled C&C: The First Decade which includes the freeware releases along with some other early C&C games and expansion packs which have never been released as freeware. Also, EA may be selling iPad and mobile conversions of those C&C games for which the original PC version was released as freeware. None of these factors necessarily means that the status of those PC games originally released as freeware has been revoked. It is possible that I'm neglecting something here, but I would suggest that additional evidence (e.g. a statement by EA declaring one or more C&C games to be no longer freeware) be produced before any C&C games be deleted from the list of available freeware and moved to the second section of the article. --Mike Agricola (talk) , 6 April (UTC)

Dreamweb[edit]

Dreamweb should be listed. (talk) , 18 November (UTC)

and done! A Google search on the game led me to ScummVM which appears to be a legitimate (i.e. respectful of copyrights) site about old PC games, so I added it. As a note, the only name I could find on the page announcing the game's freeware status was Strangerke, so I wasn't sure how to handle the pseudonym in the citation, which I wrote as:

"Strangerke" (). "Dreamweb Released As Freeware" ScummVM. Retrieved

Feel free to correct if that's not the proper format. --Mike Agricola (talk) , 19 November (UTC)

Battlefield [edit]

Battlefield was released recently as a free download on origin. It's a different version to the paid orginal, but that is only for compatibility with origin, it includes all the features of the original. Maybe we should add it to the table with a note that the freeware and paid copies are different? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) , 27 November (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. According to CNET, "To celebrate its 10th anniversary, EA's Origin store is offering Battlefield (PC) free of charge. Don't worry that it appears on Origin's Demos page; it's definitely the full game." It should be OK to add to the table because CNET, a WP:RS, states that "it's definitely the full game". The article also notes that "to get it, you'll need an Origin account and the Origin download client, both free." So I will add a note to the effect that it's "registerware freeware", which should be OK as some other games in the table, such as Grand Theft Auto, fall into the same category.

The CNET article concludes with the cautionary note, "I'm not sure if this is a limited-time giveaway or EA plans to make the game free from here on out" so we will have to keep an eye on it to see if it continues to be freely available. If not, it will have to be moved into the "Games no longer freely distributed" category. --Mike Agricola (talk) , 27 November (UTC)

From www.cronistalascolonias.com.ar "this offer is being issued to you for promotional purposes only and does not constitute a credit, charge, debit or gift card. free download expires march 1, " Tnhsr (talk) , 14 December (UTC)

A Bunch of Controversies![edit]

Greetings fellow Wikipedians. I've been working on improving the article's references by adding reliable sources supporting the freeware status of some games included there. Along the way, I've encountered issues surrounding certain games currently listed in the table. It seems best to explain what the concerns are and obtain a WP:Consensus on what to do about them (if anything):

• Codename Gordon: According to its Wiki article, the game "was distributed free of charge over Valve Software's Steam online delivery system." No indication is given that the game was ever released commercially before it became free. If this is correct, the game belongs in the List of freeware video games, not here. However, I am not at all familiar with this game, so can anyone confirm that this is the case?

• Elite/Elite Plus: The article currently states: "Freeware release in courtesy of game developer Ian Bell." And indeed, Elite and Elite Plus are both available as freeware downloads on his personal homepage. However, it would seem that Elite's co-author, David Braben, has disagreed with Bell's characterization of these games as freeware. See here for the details. Some of the links there no longer work, and I wasn't inclined to pick through all that to see if Braben ultimately agreed that Elite/Elite Plus are freeware. Nonetheless, unless someone is able to verify that all involved parties currently agree that Elite/Elite Plus may be distributed as freeware, the games' status should be regarded as ambiguous at best - and should probably be removed from the table.

• Grand Theft Auto 2, Wild Metal Country: The download pages for these two games contain the notice: "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." It's a bit ironic then that these "NOT freeware" games are listed in a table of games "released as freeware." Now I realize it could be argued that Rockstar Games is using "freeware" almost as a synonym for "public domain" and we are using a more restrictive definition of "freeware" as a game which may legally be obtained without payment (regardless of whether other conditions are attached). I've added a note in the table that these games are both "registerware freeware" and are not redistributable so that the article's readers are informed that "freeware" in this case does not mean "do whatever you want with it". If anyone thinks the situation should be handled differently, please speak up!

• Ground Control: The "Download Ground Control for free!" link in the game's article appears to still be functional. However, the Rock, Paper, Shotgun gaming website makes the statement, "Quite a few people sent in comments about classic, resource-free, 3D real time strategy Ground Control being on www.cronistalascolonias.com.ar It’s interesting to see the game up there for a number of reasons, not least because the original game was actually freely distributed by Vivendi for quite some time. Of course with Vivendi disappearing into the ActiBlizzard merger there’s all kinds of funny things going on with the ownership of their games, their distribution and so on." (Source) Can anyone confirm that this game is still *officially* freeware?

• Star Control II: The freeware version of the game, Ur-Quan Masters, appears to be a partial remake of the game, the original of which is still being sold on www.cronistalascolonias.com.ar Shacknews writes that "Developer Toys for Bob released the source code to the 3DO version of Star Control II back in , birthing a fan remake project. The Ur-Quan Masters ported the 3DO code to run on modern computers and remade all art assets, as the originals were still under copyright. Should you not want to pony up $6, you can always download that for free, though it's not quite the same as the real deal." Moreover, the source code of the 3DO port on which the freeware version is based never became a commercial product on that gaming system because the project got canceled. This source code was open-sourced (see Ur-Quan Masters entry in List of open source games) and this remake developed from it. Does this game even qualify as a former commercial freeware for inclusion in the table?

• Warzone : The game was previously removed from the table, but it seems to have been reinserted sometime after that. Should it have been?

• Zero Tolerance: According to Technopop's website, "Randel Reiss, the owner of the Zero Tolerance copyright and trademark, has made the original Zero Tolerance Sega Genesis ROM image royalty-free for distribution. Portions of the ROM image are copyright Sega and although Sega has not actively prevented royalty-free dsitribution, they have never official granted permission for distribution." Should we keep Zero Tolerance in the table?

• ZZT: Destructoid claims the game is freeware. According to ClassicDosGames, "Epic MegaGames generously released this game as freeware under the ZZT Freeware License. It is also still sold through www.cronistalascolonias.com.ar for $12 on floppy disk." (The EpicClassics site seems to be defunct as of now, but I came across it earlier this year and it was still operating at the time: Wayback Machine cache from July ) In an interview which took place in , ZZT designer Tim Sweeney stated that his father is still accepting (paid) orders for the game. Is the game *both* commercial and freeware simultaneously? Can we reliably conclude that the game is still freeware today? The situation seems rather unusual for a freeware game, so that's why it seems worth inquiring about here.

(I may have more to add later) --Mike Agricola (talk) , 28 November (UTC)

Thank you for doing such a great write up of all these games. I think Codename Gordon and Elite/Elite Plus should be removed per your arguments. You handled GTA2 fine, and I think if they want to have their own definition of freeware they can, but we will stick with ours. Ground Control seems to still be free, so I think we should leave it. Star Control II is close enough to freeware that I think it should be left unless you feel it should be removed. I think Warzone should stay on the table because it is a commercial game that is now free (and open source). Zero Tolerance should stay as well, as it is close enough for me unless you feel it should be removed. I think ZZT should be moved to the no longer freeware section. It doesn't appear to be free any more. If you can't get it from an official source, then the non-official sources such as classicdosgames do not have permission to redistribute it. Additionally, the Destructoid link you provided for that is actually a blog, so it's not Destructoid claiming it. Thank you again for taking the time to improve this article with references and eliciting discussion for changes through the proper channels. I am very impressed by your work on Wikipedia and am glad you are editing here. --Odie (talk) , 29 November (UTC)

Thanks for your reply and your encouraging words about my work on Wikipedia! Anyways, here are some thoughts: