Forums > MobyGames > Browser game naming convention?
beetle120 (2415) on 1/5/2011 11:20 AM · Permalink · Report
I have had this in my sent back list for a while.
I have this game I added called Ævil. The title is from the game itself. However, on NewGrounds where the game was added by the developer is called AEvil. I submitted an alternative title but joyvalley sent it back saying "When the developer called it this way, then we should go instead of an AKA". Is this the official way we name browser games, not by the name in the game but name on the developers or publishers website? Also what if the game has no in game name (as in the case I found with a 10 pin bowling game) and with different names depending on what site it is (some got very creative) with no official site found?
beetle120 (2415) on 1/5/2011 12:58 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start vedder wrote--]Dunno, the AEvil spelling seems more like lazy typing by the developer (not taking the effort to open the character map). I'd say Ævil should remain the main title.[/Q --end vedder wrote--] I thought that too. Another game I have just added (not yet approved) is named in the game as just 'Ninja' but on the developers website and on NewGrounds it is 'Ninja Brawl' which one would I go with there?
[Q --start vedder wrote--]As for unnamed games, try the filename maybe? [/Q --end vedder wrote--] Not a bad idea, but something is telling me that would be different too. Have to find that game again to see.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66423) on 1/6/2011 1:37 AM · Permalink · Report
Also what if the game has no in game name (as in the case I found with a 10 pin bowling game)
Names are one of the critical items (others: release date, platform, genres, rating categories) that we just can't submit a game without. Most of the latter can be filled in by someone with access to the game, but names and dates are still stickling points.
My advice is to find A name that SOMEONE refers to it by, as it can always be corrected later on to a more official name. But dateless games are still up a creek without a paddle.
beetle120 (2415) on 1/6/2011 8:18 AM · Permalink · Report
I like to be more official when naming games then just someone somewhere calls it that, but I understand to this is all it has to go by then that is probably the best your going to get.
As with dates with some research you can generally find an 'added on:' on the host/developer website and if that fails then always web archive, not super accurate, but at least it gets the month and year.
But back to my original question, is it better to have the game title as shown on the developers website or the title in the game? This comes up in most browser games I add.
Indra was here (20752) on 1/6/2011 12:07 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start beetle120 wrote--]But back to my original question, is it better to have the game title as shown on the developers website or the title in the game? This comes up in most browser games I add. [/Q --end beetle120 wrote--] The one most likely deemed official. Only way to know that is by comparing names after research. For example: Mount&Blade. Their stupid website almost always types in Mount & Blade. If it weren't for an official press release, I would have sent in a title correction.
So, just because it's from the developer/publisher, doesn't mean it's 100% correct. They're usually the first to screw it up. :p
Pseudo_Intellectual (66423) on 1/6/2011 10:43 PM · Permalink · Report
Of course, we shouldn't give too much credence to logos either -- or should Half-Life really be spelled with that lambda character?
Indra was here (20752) on 1/6/2011 11:08 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]Of course, we shouldn't give too much credence to logos either -- or should Half-Life really be spelled with that lambda character? [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] If they bothered to do the same thing with an official press release.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66423) on 1/8/2011 8:55 AM · Permalink · Report
While we're discussing names, I noticed a game called "Dark Messiah Might and Magic". I thought to myself, isn't there an OF missing there? Then I looked again and saw a game present with the existing name, both with identical cover artwork, one entered with OF and one without.
Are the various flavours of that recent M&M game Dark Messiah of Might and Magic or just Dark Messiah Might and Magic? (Or would we go off the deep end and just call it Dark Messiah, understanding the rest to be a series or brand name and not the game name, as cooler heads might with Rockstar Presents Table Tennis or, say, Disney Epic Mickey.)
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (98969) on 1/8/2011 9:21 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]While we're discussing names, I noticed a game called "Dark Messiah Might and Magic". I thought to myself, isn't there an OF missing there? Then I looked again and saw a game present with the existing name, both with identical cover artwork, one entered with OF and one without.
Are the various flavours of that recent M&M game Dark Messiah of Might and Magic or just Dark Messiah Might and Magic? (Or would we go off the deep end and just call it Dark Messiah, understanding the rest to be a series or brand name and not the game name, as cooler heads might with Rockstar Presents Table Tennis or, say, Disney Epic Mickey.) [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] This? Clearly, it is actually called Might and Magic: Dark Messiah: Might and Magic.
Seriously though, doesn't look like any of the covers on file have the "of", so they should probably be Dark Messiah: Might and Magic and Dark Messiah: Might and Magic - Elements.
vedder (71091) on 1/8/2011 10:22 AM · Permalink · Report
Holy crap. I have that games and never noticed the absence of "of". All reviews and previews I've seen called it that as well. But Squarewave is right it should be "Might and Magic: Dark Messiah"
"Dark Messiah of Might and Magic" should be an alternative "commonly used title" though.
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (98969) on 1/9/2011 4:32 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Kabushi wrote--]Both changed [/Q --end Kabushi wrote--] This one needs a colon added, too.
Terok Nor (42635) on 1/8/2011 1:56 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start vedder wrote--] "Dark Messiah of Might and Magic" should be an alternative "commonly used title" though. [/Q --end vedder wrote--]
Better make that a "working title" - it was used in all previews and announcements before the game's release - that's why everyone still uses it.
Indra was here (20752) on 1/8/2011 1:57 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Now don't get me started on AD&D titles. See example: Forgotten Realms (not really complete...didn't add the AD&D stuff in front of each title :p). Oh, it needs to be renamed to Forgotten Realms games, btw. (just sent minor edit to reflect changes).
Which reminds me. We it seems we don't have any games based on D&D licensees, only based on AD&D licensees. Do I suspect this correctly?
I also would like to promote the use of (TM) und (R) but only in alternate titles, for game titles that have been trademarked.
Indra was here (20752) on 1/8/2011 2:11 PM · Permalink · Report
Unofficial it seems. Doesn't count due to the lack of license and all. If the name was Games using D&D/AD&D rules, it would, but let's not go there. :p
Terok Nor (42635) on 1/8/2011 2:05 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Indra was here wrote--] Which reminds me. We it seems we don't have any games based on D&D licensees, only based on AD&D licensees. Do I suspect this correctly? [/Q --end Indra was here wrote--]
Stronghold and Fantasy Empires are based on (Original) D&D.
Indra was here (20752) on 1/8/2011 2:22 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Terok Nor wrote--]Stronghold and Fantasy Empires are based on (Original) D&D. [/Q --end Terok Nor wrote--] Well, I'll be damned. Just noticed the coverart. Would prefer AD&D and D&D be separated though. Not entirely sure why. :)
beetle120 (2415) on 1/10/2011 11:29 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Indra was here wrote--] [Q2 --start Terok Nor wrote--]Stronghold and Fantasy Empires are based on (Original) D&D. [/Q2 --end Terok Nor wrote--] Well, I'll be damned. Just noticed the coverart. Would prefer AD&D and D&D be separated though. Not entirely sure why. :) [/Q --end Indra was here wrote--]
I would love to see all the D&D game split up like D&D, AD&D, D&D 2, D&D 3, D&D 3.5, and D&D 4 (is there any 4 edition games yet?) as they all play very different from a rules point of view.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66423) on 1/10/2011 4:30 PM · Permalink · Report
Currently we track the use of the brand, which is a different thing indeed from tracking which ruleset is purring under the hood 8)
Pseudo_Intellectual (66423) on 1/10/2011 5:37 PM · Permalink · Report
While we don't currently track which version of the rules is being used (though the logo employed can be a dead giveaway), we do track in which campaign world the story is set... except when we don't. Which is to say for the Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Dark Sun and Ravenloft settings, all of which have many games, we have groups. For very rarely-visited campaign settings such as Planescape (1 game), Spelljammer (1 game) and Greyhawk (?!@# 1 game) we do not have groups (for after all, you can't have a group of one.)
I've taken it upon myself to figure out in what worlds the remaining, undifferentiated and ungrouped D&D games are set, if any:
Eberron: Stormreach appears to be a setting in the Eberron world, so those games get thrown together and get a group of their own along with Dragonshard, which apparently also happens "there"!
Mystara: the original D&D world is the explicit setting of Warriors of the Eternal Sun and Order of the Griffon. The jury's still out on whether D&D-rule-using Stronghold is, but Fantasy Empires' manual explicitly situates it there also.
D&D Heroes takes place at Castle Baele, setting the heroes against wizard Kaedin, both names appearing nowhere else in D&D literature. Ha! But there is in it a "Church of Pelor", a divine power from the Greyhawk setting, situating this game there along with The Temple of Elemental Evil?
The Gorgon's Alliance appears to be the first and last game to be set in TSR's brief Birthright world of Anuire, so will likely never get a group.
Slayer and Deathkeep? Your guess is as good as mine. Ditto for the first two Intellivision installments. And that's a wrap! Time for me to make some groups...
Pseudo_Intellectual (66423) on 1/10/2011 6:36 PM · Permalink · Report
Sweet Jebus, I thought that the Greyhawk Wikipedia entry would set things straight but I couldn't be more wrong. On the bright side, we don't have to make sense of it until we get a few 4th ed. conversions up here at Mobygames 8)
Indra was here (20752) on 1/10/2011 6:28 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Let me know on all those DundD groups you're going to make/have made...so I can organize them tidily in each game group. I would believe that the D&D/A&D license game group would qualify as the parent game group.
[edit] To Rowan: Me thinks you might want to re-edit yer revise: These role playing games evolved from board games published under the same brand...since not all of them are role-playing games.
Will experiment with the use of 'Sub-Groups' und 'Parent Group' for this, instead of just a simple 'Related Groups'.
[edit] [edit]
Any particular reason why some groups have an SSI in front of them? E.g. SSI Dragonlance games.
Indra was here (20752) on 1/10/2011 6:44 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]For very rarely-visited campaign settings such as Planescape (1 game), Spelljammer (1 game) and Greyhawk (?!@# 1 game) we do not have groups (for after all, you can't have a group of one.) [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] We do however, have the total luxury of organizing their mention in the game group descriptions.
schemes mischievously