Forums > Game Forums > Commandos: Battle Pack > Separate release instead of AKA?
Geamandura (2326) on 3/25/2010 9:28 AM · Permalink · Report
The release of GOG.com is listed here as an alternative name, Commandos 2+3. I'm asking because (after all this contributing time :P) I'm still not sure about the rules of MG. Should we have a separate entry for the GOG.com release? I mean, how much does the AKA extend? Is it used just for one publisher's release under different names? Does it also extend to multiple releases from different publishers (as is the case here)?
Patrick Bregger (301030) on 3/25/2010 10:01 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
I'd say that the same rule apply as with "regular" games: content matters, not companies. If the content of two games is identical, it is the same entry - and with companies this translates to: if the same games are included, it is one entry. It may be not ideal, but what about compilation entries on MobyGames is ideal?
Of course there is also that "special edition, own entry" deal. Most GoG releases include special extras, e.g. avatars, manuals, soundtracks or hint books - enough to warrant an own entry?
vedder (70812) on 3/25/2010 10:54 AM · Permalink · Report
That's why that special edition rule is idiotic. Why does a game which specifically mentions it is a special edition get its own database entry. But if it doesn't but still features different feelies it doesn't get its own entry.
If it were up to me it would all get lumped into the same game entry. With the differences either detailed in the description or release info and through scans.
Sciere (930488) on 3/25/2010 11:59 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
Next to the "list what you can buy" argument you already know, we also are a collector's database. If someone has three different editions of the same game, there's no way for them to list all three editions as a part of the have list. A game entry can only be included once.
Patrick Bregger (301030) on 3/25/2010 12:20 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
I agree with vedder: I absolutely don't agree with the policy that a release with special content only gets an entry when it mentions "Special Edition" on the package. See Simon the Sorcerer's Pinball. But I think it is good to have separate entries for special editions.
[q]If someone has three different editions of the same game, there's no way for them to list all three editions as a part of the have list. A game entry can only be included once.[/q] That's not true. You can add multiple games manually into the same list. For example: I have two entries of Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow on my "Duplicates" list.
vedder (70812) on 3/25/2010 1:56 PM · Permalink · Report
But the same argument holds for splitting up this entry :)
In fact it holds for splitting every single release into a new game entry. Because a collector might want to keep track of the fact that he has both a Spanish and a US version of a game.
My opinion thus stays unchanged :)
What would solve this issue once and for all is if the "Have list" didn't track game entries but releases. Then clicking "Add to Have List" would prompt the user with selecting a specific release and all info partaining a single game could be consolidated into one game entry. Even better if it also linked to compilations. So that you could for example go to "Portal". Click "Add to Have List" and then select the Italian Orange Box release.
Ah, one can dream...