The chems need to be broken down by game. As I see it, list each game individually, and either designate addictive chems per game with an "(a)" or use two subtitles per game (addictive, non-addictive). This method has the benefit of people being able to look straight down for the game they are currently playing, pulling all information straight off the list and being able to print that section. This method is most applicable to wiki users.
Or, just keep the current listing by addiction and non-addiction. It's easier, it's already there. I have to hunt down the list for the chem, and then attempt to figure out how it relates to my game, usually by clicking on its page and then reading down that make sure it's even in my game or if I've got the name wrong.
I'm prepared to break them down by game, but I don't want to spend 30 minutes verifying each game chem only to have it undone because it looks unprofessional.
- To be honest, I think this page should be redone in the style of e.g. the non-player character article: Just an explanation what chems/drugs/edibles are and linking the respective "per game" overview pages. Except for Fallout 3 consumables, most per-game overview pages (Fallout consumables, Fallout 2 consumables etc) are still missing and adding them would be appreciated. In terms of organization, using tables (like the FO3 overview page does) is probably most convenient for readers as it allows them to see everything at a glance and sort the table by whichever characteristic they like.
- Regarding your comment regarding "unprofessional", I understand it annoys you having your edits undone - but you need to understand that there are customs, conventions and guidelines on this wiki concerning how certain things should be done in order to achieve a streamlined and professional appearance. They are widely used and accepted; maybe you should consider whether asking everybody else to adapt to your views is not asking a bit much. I'll leave it at that. -- Porter21 (talk) 15:25, October 30, 2009 (UTC)
I don't know how to handle all the addiction discussion. I don't know if it needs to be moved off to the game edible pages, or each game put under a heading here.Pinkynperky04 15:58, October 30, 2009 (UTC)
- There doesn't really need to be much info on addictions in this article (or the game overview pages). Just link to Addiction (in the table header, for example), that page is more suited for discussing them. -- Porter21 (talk) 16:20, October 30, 2009 (UTC)
With the drug stacking available in Fallout 4, it needs its own page for drug affects and how they stack. This page is just not useful for FO4 drug information. --Tom Quantum (talk) 20:37, February 7, 2016 (UTC)
Going cold turkey Edit
The article mentions that you can overcome chem addication by waiting it out. Is that present in all fallout games? Various other articles suggest that addiction can only be cured by doctors or my first infirmary in Fallout 3.
I dont remember Fallout 1 much, cause I dont like it. In Fallout 2, Fallout Tactics, and Fallout Vegas, going cold turkey, ie dont take that drug anymore, until your withdrawal fade, is the one constant way to fix nearly all addictions. IIRC, Fallout 2 has Jet addiction is the scariest with longest duration/highest rate, ie indefinitely unless have Jet antidote. Buffout, Mentats, Nuka, Radaway(heh), and Psycho all have duration of one week. if you ever heard somebody talked about sleeping for a week more than likely they were trying to get rid off addictions. Fallout Tactics doesnt have doctors curing addiction, but dont quote me on that. Still, from my experience of playing Vegas chem-abuser, going cold turkey is an unconstant way of curing addiction. sometimes it work after a short while, sometimes it's not. Same deal with chem effect duration, sometimes they work for at least 8 hours (like in certain Vaults) sometimes it's only to 3 hours, and sometimes it's exactly as advertised.
Anyway, as for the organized list of chems for FNV, I support that idea. You guys do it, I will add what I can. I hesitate to start it because I really hate being deleted. Get into arguments with lots of folks around here because of that.Laclongquan (talk) 08:10, May 28, 2013 (UTC)