Forums > Game Forums > Blue Toad Murder Files: Mysteries of Little Riddle - Episode 1: Little Riddle's Deadly Dilemma > Is Episode 1 a game entry in its own right?
piltdown_man (236739) on 5/24/2011 6:22 PM · Permalink · Report
Is Episode 1 considered a game in its own right or should this game description be updated and re-titled to reflect the complete game that is now available? I confess to having a vested interest because I somehow missed this entry on the database and started creating a new one for the game as a whole.
This game consists of six linked episodes each telling a part of the whole story. Episode 1 is available for download on a 'try before you buy' basis. The full game is available for purchase on Amazon, either as individual episodes or as a full 'bundle' or from Relentless' web site.
The game's web site where episode 1 can be downloaded : http://www.bluetoadmurderfiles.co.uk/
The full game is available here for PC : http://www.amazon.com/Blue-Toad-Murder-Files-Mysteries/dp/B004D4YE3S/ref=sr_1_1?s=videogames&ie=UTF8&qid=1306259082&sr=1-1
and here for PS3 : http://www.amazon.com/Murder-Files-Episodes-Bundle-Online/dp/B003TEF6YE/ref=sr_1_2?s=videogames&ie=UTF8&qid=1306259082&sr=1-2
Patrick Bregger (301035) on 5/24/2011 6:59 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
I know for a fact that episode one was released commercially on PSN and was only made freeware later. The episodes were released individually and were priced indivually (the first two were released simultaneously and could be bought together for a small discount; don't know about the other four). As far as I know you couldn't pre-order all episodes at once; the bundles were released afterwards.
I think the episodes should get their own entries.
Lain Crowley (6629) on 5/24/2011 7:16 PM · Permalink · Report
From what I remember back when the PS store was still up Blue Toad was first only available as individual episodes, then they packaged them all together as well as sets of episodes (1+2, 3+4, 5+6, 1-3, and 4-6). They did a bunch of bundling shenanigans so that they could keep the game popping up on the new releases pane.
Indra was here (20755) on 5/25/2011 2:45 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
Let me get this straight:
- The full game consists of six episodes;
- Each episode is available separately?
migraine
Although our first policy in this regard is to document the release of game (then the game), we still have a lot of gray areas to distinct the fine line of downloadable releases in the form of patches or updates. So try these scenarios. The approvers will correct me if I'm wrong:
Scenario #1:
- Full game consists of six episodes;
- Full game available separately;
- Each of the six episodes are available separately;
4a. Each episode is standalone, not requiring any other of the episodes to play;
4b. Each episode requires only the original game to play (i.e. episode 1).
4c. Each episode requires previous episode to play;
4d. Some episodes were released in a bundle (e.g. Episode 4+5).
Result:
4a. Seven new game entries. One for the full game, the others for the six episodes;
4b. Seven new game entries. One for the full game, the others for the six episodes. Add add-on in the sub-genre selection for the other five episodes;
4c. I have no idea what this would mean. Probably same as the above; :p
4d. Treat as a compilation entry. Unless e.g. Episode 4 and 5 were not available separately.
Scenario #2:
Migraines just got worse. :p
piltdown_man (236739) on 5/26/2011 9:48 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
I struggled to see why each episode should have its own entry but, having read your post and the posts from Lain Crowley & Patrick Bregger I now understand, it's because each episode could be played individually. I'm OK with that though, imo, the database will reflect not new/changed game content but a clever marketing strategy.
Question 1 : For future reference, if a game is released episodically but each episode requires the previous episodes to be present would it be correct in using the above arguments to class the whole release as a single game?
All of my reading on this subject, largely based on Amazon and the Relentless web site where the game is currently being offered for sale, shows that the PS3 platform is the only platform where the game was released episodically or in groups of episodes. The only references to the PC that I've been able to find are for downloads of the full game but I'm trying to verify this.
Assuming that the company's PC / PS3 release policy has been understood correctly and that I have grasped the arguments put forward thus far, I think the seven game entries proposed is an underestimate. Prepare for another migraine but by my reckoning the full & correct representation of this game on the database would be a staggering fifteen entries ;
a. One entry for the full commercial game on both PS3 & PC.
b. One entry for each of the six separately released episodes, probably PS3 platform only, with 'add-on' in the sub-genre selection for episodes 2 - 6
c. Separate entries for each of the PS3 episode bundles (1+2, 3+4, 5+6, 1-3 are the ones that we know about thanks to Lian)
d. One Shareware entry for both the PC & PS3 versions of the game as episode 1 is now available on both platforms as try before you buy, though these could be covered by annotating the full commercial entries.
e. One Special Edition for the PS3 platform because the game was released with an Advent Calendar Theme for PlayStation Network on 23/24 November 2010
Question 2 : Does anyone agree with the above?
Indra was here (20755) on 5/26/2011 10:07 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start piltdown man wrote--]a. One entry for the full commercial game on both PS3 & PC.
b. One entry for each of the six separately released episodes, probably PS3 platform only, with 'add-on' in the sub-genre selection for episodes 2 - 6
c. Separate entries for each of the PS3 episode bundles (1+2, 3+4, 5+6, 1-3 are the ones that we know about thanks to Lian)
d. One Shareware entry for both the PC & PS3 versions of the game as episode 1 is now available on both platforms as try before you buy, though these could be covered by annotating the full commercial entries.
e. One Special Edition for the PS3 platform because the game was released with an Advent Calendar Theme for PlayStation Network on 23/24 November 2010
Question 2 : Does anyone agree with the above? [/Q --end piltdown man wrote--] Sounds about right: separate and unique release=new entry. Free/share/commercial-ware and region is irrelevant in this regard though.
starts wondering again what MG constitutes as a new game entry and why
discovers new inhuman levels of migraines
Though don't get me started about patches/updates cleverly disguising themselves as separate entries. My brain capacity is a tad limited to solve that issue :p
vedder (70822) on 5/26/2011 10:33 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start piltdown man wrote--]I struggled to see why each episode should have its own entry but, having read your post and the posts from Lain Crowley & Patrick Bregger I now understand, it's because each episode could be played individually. I'm OK with that though, imo, the database will reflect not new/changed game content but a clever marketing strategy.
Question 1 : For future reference, if a game is released episodically but each episode requires the previous episodes to be present would it be correct in using the above arguments to class the whole release as a single game?
All of my reading on this subject, largely based on Amazon and the Relentless web site where the game is currently being offered for sale, shows that the PS3 platform is the only platform where the game was released episodically or in groups of episodes. The only references to the PC that I've been able to find are for downloads of the full game but I'm trying to verify this.
Assuming that the company's PC / PS3 release policy has been understood correctly and that I have grasped the arguments put forward thus far, I think the seven game entries proposed is an underestimate. Prepare for another migraine but by my reckoning the full & correct representation of this game on the database would be a staggering fifteen entries ;
a. One entry for the full commercial game on both PS3 & PC.
b. One entry for each of the six separately released episodes, probably PS3 platform only, with 'add-on' in the sub-genre selection for episodes 2 - 6
c. Separate entries for each of the PS3 episode bundles (1+2, 3+4, 5+6, 1-3 are the ones that we know about thanks to Lian)
d. One Shareware entry for both the PC & PS3 versions of the game as episode 1 is now available on both platforms as try before you buy, though these could be covered by annotating the full commercial entries.
e. One Special Edition for the PS3 platform because the game was released with an Advent Calendar Theme for PlayStation Network on 23/24 November 2010
Question 2 : Does anyone agree with the above? [/Q --end piltdown man wrote--]
And this is exactly why we should document games and not releases. Electronic Distribution is hell. Our current method of documentation made sense for the games released at the time when MobyGames was founded, but it's incredibly messy for anything distributed electronically, as shareware or early type-in games with their infinite variations.
Indra was here (20755) on 5/26/2011 11:40 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start vedder wrote--]And this is exactly why we should document games and not releases. Electronic Distribution is hell. [/Q --end vedder wrote--]It's all that bad. Only downside is that it messes up the search results and somewhat redundant entries where the only difference is an additional screensaver. Days of the comic nerds are at an end in the digital world -- alternate covers are about a dime a dozen these days.
Personally, I'd like to see a lot of merging done, preferably with hide box features. No more separate entries for expansions, add-ons, DLCs, different platforms, updates, patches...all of them go on the same page, allowing users to see the original game and anything connected to that game on the same page (including relevant compilations) without having to go through a ridiculous amount of internal links.
Not entirely sure how that can be implemented and look tidy at the same time, but at least we'll get rid of those redundant entries where the only release difference is an additional screensaver and the lead designer's autographed undies. :p
Yep. Hide boxes. There must be a god. :p
Documenting games instead of releases however, introduces a lot of problems we've never even discussed yet, though usually related to compilations/editions/bundles/etc. Don't even think it's possible to change considering that stuff is already hardcoded in MG.
vedder (70822) on 5/26/2011 11:46 AM · Permalink · Report
Maybe I didn't have enough sleep, but I don't see the difference between your first and second option. The first sounds good in any case.
As for compilations, that could just be release info with the note of the compilation name (and automated links to other games in the compilation if you click expand, for example). Upload compilation covers? Check all games that apply and it'll show up on those games' pages.
The real problem is creating a system that covers as many future possibilities as possible, to not have the same discussion in ten years.
Indra was here (20755) on 5/26/2011 12:46 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start vedder wrote--][1] Maybe I didn't have enough sleep, but I don't see the difference between your first and second option.
[2] The real problem is creating a system that covers as many future possibilities as possible, to not have the same discussion in ten years. [/Q --end vedder wrote--] [1] Not enough sleep. I didn't know I was proposing a second option. :p
[2] That's not the problem. The real problem is a system unadaptive to change...which is basically the source of our problems before, now, and no doubt for years to come. We solve that, any future issue we can fight and fix amongst ourselves. Or basically the same whining we have each year to no avail.
vedder (70822) on 5/26/2011 1:22 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Indra was here wrote--] [1] Not enough sleep. I didn't know I was proposing a second option. :p [/Q --end Indra was here wrote--]
Oh I see now what I read wrong. Anyway you're completely right. A, it would be better and B, the problem is a lack of dedicated developers.