Question: It is a given that, with time, questions and answers will become out dated. Good answers will not always apply to future patches, and questions may concern issues that simply do not exist in newer patches.

I have been linked to a few meta posts regarding the appropriate action. [The consensus here](https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/946/outdated-answers-due-to-patches) is that out of date answers should be edited to be up to date.

The same mod has answered [a similar question](https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1339/how-should-we-deal-with-out-of-date-questions-answers), showing a markdown method to keep the original authors intent, but since has steered towards "leave a comment, alert the author" and "post your own, up to date answer".

[There is another similar question](https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1527/update-old-answers-according-to-patch-notes-for-unreleased-patch), however it does not appear to have had as much traffic, and the accepted answer appears to be a reference to the first question.

This is where my question comes in. **Is it appropriate to add completely new content to a question, where there is a new solution due to newer changes to the game**?

What defines the difference between updating an answer to be current, and going against the authors intent?

Answer: 
**It depends.** Yes, posting your own answer gives you more reputation (any reputation for users above 2k). But that's not really why we're here, no? We're here to provide expertise on a subject, not just to earn imaginary internet points.

With this in mind, it absolutely depends on what the edit entails. Remember the actual text of the "radical change" suggested edit rejection criteria: "Clearly conflicts with author intent". To me, this implies that an edit should be rejected under this criterion if it unambiguously conflicts with the intended meaning of the post: If your edit changes an answer's meaning entirely, for example, changing an outdated no to an updated yes, it should be a new answer. If your edit is describing a wholly new process by which a user can accomplish what they are asking about, then it should be a new answer.

But if you are merely updating basic information in an answer, or adding some minor information to an answer that is now incomplete after an update, that is absolutely acceptable. It doesn't do us any good to have 3 separate answers saying roughly the same thing because some of the details may have changed slightly.

Edits are not and should not be just for the express purpose of fixing grammatical and spelling errors, especially here on Arqade, where details are often subject to change on a monthly basis. We should be fixing minor details, where it doesn't *clearly* conflict with the author's intent, and posting new answers in cases where the original answer no longer applies.
I disagree with the other answers. **It really depends on what sort of editing you are doing.**

**TL;DR** Edit if you're just updating old information, post a new answer if you're adding content.

---

I believe edits **should be used if you are updating the existing, obselete information. You're not adding anything; just updating.** Look at the below example:

> 
> **Q:** [Minecraft] How can I make a golden apple?
> 
> 
> **A:** You can make an 'enchanted golden apple' with one apple surrounded by 8 gold blocks.
> 
> 
> ~~For a normal golden apple, you need to surround the apple in gold nuggets, which are dropped by Zombie Pigmen. However, this is less powerful than the enchanted version.~~ 
> 
> 
> As of version 1.6.1, normal golden apples are created by surrounding an apple with 8 gold *ingots*.
> 
> 
> [please note the history of golden apples has been simplified]
> 
> 
> 

This is a good edit as it updates the answer to the current version of the game without adding any additional unnecessary content. Any new content that you add yourself is going against the author's intent.

---

However, **if you are adding new content** (such as a new strategy/procedure, or correcting the answer since it is wrong) **it should be posted as a new answer.** 

Take the previous example; if I were to add that chickens now drop golden poop [they do not, ignore this example] and explained how to turn this into ingots (hence into golden apples), this would be a **bad** edit since it adds new content to the answer, which goes against the original intent of the answerer. 

Anyway, posting a new answer will give you more rep than simply editing the existing answer, so you've got nothing to lose.

---

So really, it depends what your edit is. Avoid overwriting the original post, but make sure that it is up to date. 

If your new answer is up against a highly-voted answer which is out of date, edit in a notice stating that this content is out of date as of version X.X to make users read on. 

Also, remember to **never edit completely incorrect answers to be correct**. [A question in the Meta.SE FAQ](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5408/what-is-the-etiquette-for-correcting-old-questions-with-incorrect-answers) has already decided that incorrect content should not be edited to be correct.