Forums > MobyGames > Griping for new platforms thread.
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95233) on 2/22/2010 1:33 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
So. I've recently decided to not let Oleg be the only person adding PC-98 games to the database. There is a metric ton of software for the thing, and even with the hundreds of games he's added we've still only scratched the surface. There's a lot of porn for it, of course (it is a Japanese computer, after all!), but more alarmingly, there are a lot of ports of western DOS games. Popular games ported to new hardware, sometimes even with new, hi-res graphics. Several publishers, like EA Victor, Imagineer, and especially Starcraft built their entire businesses around this sort of thing.
Yes, we have the tech spec. That doesn't help in these situations -- we can't assign tech specs by specific release info. These games are not the same as the original DOS versions, and I don't believe we should try to stuff them together with the original DOS versions. Our DOS versions won't run on this hardware, and these DOS versions won't run on our hardware. But because the OS they use is some sort of DOS, we're lumping them together with DOS. There's versions of Windows 3.1 and 95 for it. Things eventually merged together in the latter part of the '90s, and standard Windows PCs took over. But back in 1982, when the platform was introduced, it was definitely its own thing, and I think we should respect this for the sake of accuracy.
...alright, rant over. I'm sure other people here have their own pet platforms they want to see added. BBC Micro anyone? :)
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95233) on 2/22/2010 4:31 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Foxhack wrote--]I mean, it was enough for the flippin' Sega CD AND TG-16 CD. [/Q --end Foxhack wrote--] These systems have the advantage of having been released in North America. Which, sadly, seems to be (almost!) the universal rule here.
The tech specs on this one would be incredibly simple, too. 1-side/2-side disk? Available on rewritable disks/retail release? Bam.
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 2/22/2010 12:28 PM · Permalink · Report
With the weird system we're having, converting current DOS with tech spec PC-98 to a new PC-98 platform would require a new submission of everything we've submitted for PC-98 so far.
I'm not doing it again, sorry. We are talking 200+ games. Either admins find a new way to painlessly convert all DOS+tech spec entries to PC-98, or I'm afraid it will stay the way it is.
And the more entries are submitted, the harder it becomes.
My personal rant?
ADD THE DAMN FM TOWNS AND X68000 ALREADY!!!
Corn Popper promised to add it around the new year. Maybe he meant Chinese New Year?! Well, it's over too, now!
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95233) on 2/22/2010 6:15 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Unicorn Lynx wrote--]With the weird system we're having, converting current DOS with tech spec PC-98 to a new PC-98 platform would require a new submission of everything we've submitted for PC-98 so far.
I'm not doing it again, sorry. We are talking 200+ games. Either admins find a new way to painlessly convert all DOS+tech spec entries to PC-98, or I'm afraid it will stay the way it is.[/Q --end Unicorn Lynx wrote--] I was afraid of that. Hopefully given that there is the tech spec that keeps them separate, there would be a way to batch convert them and allow for cleanup after. Wishful thinking, I know. I imagine entering data for games released on both formats would make it exceptionally messy, so if no platform is added, then these releases will never be documented...
Also, because there's so much shouting going on in this thread directed at the admins...we really do love you guys! We just also love Mobygames and want to make it better! :)
Tracy Poff (2094) on 2/22/2010 6:29 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
we really do love you guys! We just also love Mobygames and want to make it better! :)
"Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more."
Admins take note. We don't want to repeat history.
Indra was here (20755) on 2/22/2010 6:37 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Tracy Poff wrote--]Admins take note. We don't want to repeat history. [/Q --end Tracy Poff wrote--] Actually we repeat history at least once a week. Muahahaha!
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 2/23/2010 7:02 AM · Permalink · Report
"Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more."
Good one :) That pretty much sums my political position in MG :)
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 2/23/2010 7:09 AM · Permalink · Report
Hopefully given that there is the tech spec that keeps them separate, there would be a way to batch convert them and allow for cleanup after.
Well, Sciere told me the only way would be to re-submit the new PC98 platform for all these DOS+ tech spec entries, and then submit corrections to remove DOS platform and move screenshots to the new PC98 one.
Which is of course madness. There must be a painless, automatic way to simply change DOS to PC98 for all entries with the PC98 tech spec.
Indra was here (20755) on 2/25/2010 4:57 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Unicorn Lynx wrote--]There must be a painless, automatic way to simply change DOS to PC98 for all entries with the PC98 tech spec. [/Q --end Unicorn Lynx wrote--]God forgot to create that algorithm in the source code when existence was created. :p
Kaminari (1081) on 3/13/2010 3:20 PM · Permalink · Report
I've been advocating for years that the British "Sinclair Spectrum" computer be officially renamed as the US "Timex TS-2068", because everyone (except those goofy guys outside the States) recognizes that Timex was the international name of Sinclair.
Yeah... Sorry for the irony.
I've said it all along (PC Engine vs. TurboGrafx, etc). If you can't do it right, don't do it at all. I've warned a long time ago that the PC-98 was not a PC, whatever the OS they might share. And I've warned that creating PC-98 entries under the DOS category would lead to irreconcilable mess. It's one of the reasons why I never agreed to add PC-98 games in the current database.
And now here we are, the shit has hit the fan.
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95233) on 3/13/2010 6:47 PM · Permalink · Report
I've seen you mention this before, but I'm still not sure what you mean with the PCE/TG16 thing. They're the same hardware with the same games, just in a different case with a different card pinout.
There has to be a way to fix the PC-98 and get it documented correctly. Hell, if it needs someone to go through manually and move every single game by hand, then I'd gladly volunteer. I've done that kind of tedium tenfold for VGR, I can do it again here. :P
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 3/14/2010 4:27 AM · Permalink · Report
Hell, if it needs someone to go through manually and move every single game by hand, then I'd gladly volunteer.
But don't you think it's ridiculous that the only way we can turn all those DOS + tech spec entries into PC-98 entries is by adding PC-98 all over again and then submitting corrections to move DOS content to PC-98? Is it me, or is it very ridiculous?
And we all know how quickly corrections are being approved here! I mean, with any luck, even if we introduce PC-98 platform today, we'll have all the entries corrected when the next Olympics begin.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/14/2010 5:10 AM · Permalink · Report
Certainly there's a lot here that's ridiculous, but still we stay for lack of anywhere "better" to go. If only there were some clear path toward solving our numerous grievances. Even if the answer is "hire a programmer to work on the site full-time" then we could strategise ways to raise their salary.
MZ per X (3017) on 3/15/2010 9:04 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]Certainly there's a lot here that's ridiculous, but still we stay for lack of anywhere "better" to go. [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] A little off-topic, but...
Every time I read such a statement I wonder how seriously it is meant. Given a truly "better" project would show up - where really everything is contributable by users (including platforms and even source code) and decisions would follow democracy - would you (you as in Top50 contributors) really leave your points here and re-do what's been achieved here in the last 10 years?
Quite frankly, I doubt it.
Indra was here (20755) on 3/15/2010 6:21 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start MZ per X wrote--] [Q2 --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]Certainly there's a lot here that's ridiculous, but still we stay for lack of anywhere "better" to go. [/Q2 --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] A little off-topic, but...
Every time I read such a statement I wonder how seriously it is meant. Given a truly "better" project would show up - where really everything is contributable by users (including platforms and even source code) and decisions would follow democracy - would you (you as in Top50 contributors) really leave your points here and re-do what's been achieved here in the last 10 years?
Quite frankly, I doubt it. [/Q --end MZ per X wrote--] You'd be surprised. Some have just packed up and left.
Indra was here (20755) on 3/17/2010 5:13 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start MZ per X wrote--] [Q2 --start Dewa Indra? wrote--] You'd be surprised. Some have just packed up and left. [/Q2 --end Dewa Indra? wrote--] But where did they go then? [/Q --end MZ per X wrote--] Retirement. Horrendous as it seems, there is a life outside MobyGames. :p
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/16/2010 2:06 AM · Permalink · Report
I already have to go elsewhere to document games that MG doesn't support. If I had my druthers, I'd do it here, but sometimes it doesn't want all we have to give.
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 3/16/2010 3:51 AM · Permalink · Report
I already have to go elsewhere to document games that MG doesn't support
Where? And what kind of games? You should bug Corn Popper until he agrees to document them.
Hey, nothing happens here without excessive bugging (and patience that would challenge an experienced yogi). But bugging helps... sometimes.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/16/2010 4:17 AM · Permalink · Report
Platform-independent software generally, text adventures being an important case. We are making progress in some important areas (type-in BASIC listings, for instance) and making no apparent progress in others (total conversions, mainframes, arcade machines, games whose date of release will never be known for sure, and the BBC micro whose absence stymied my first game submission in 2004 (the Imogen remake) and still is no closer to hitting prime time six years later!) Other niche areas that interest me (naturally, the nichier the better -- eg IRC games, computer-moderated PBM games) I can only expect to ever get approved here by accident -- and then they run the risk of actually being redacted.
MZ per X (3017) on 3/16/2010 1:38 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]Platform-independent software generally, text adventures being an important case. [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] Yeah, I think we should just call what we already have by the right name: Software platforms. IMHO Linux, DOS, Windows, Browser are just that.
And if you see it that way than there is no reason why Z-Code, BASIC or maybe even ScummVM shouldn't be added as a software platform.
And as this is the griping for new platforms thread: I'd like to see Flash getting ripped out of Browser for its ocean of games and stand-alone players.
vedder (70822) on 3/16/2010 3:30 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
An alternative "solution" to the problem would be to change our current "Browser"-platform to "Platform Independent" which would open up a gate for any Platform Independent type of video game (Z-Code, Basic, etc.). The tech specs might in that case become an ineligible mess however.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/16/2010 4:24 PM · Permalink · Report
This "solution" is well-intended but I think that (even though it gets me what I want -- a z-code loophole, already extant through the Parchment browser interpreter) it would lead to larger problems down the road representing the entire reason that the platform-adding process is so painstakingly slow and measured. PC-98 aside, typically the main criterion needed before opening a new platform is being satisfied that we have enough info on file that we won't be structurally required to make hundreds of corrections later on down the line 8)
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/16/2010 4:20 PM · Permalink · Report
There are many flavours of browser-game technology; they're currently lumped together for convenience despite having few if any shared technological underpinings -- some are client-run, some are server-run.
Splitting is ultimately more useful than lumping, but I'm concerned that if we were to split them, many platform-independent browser game software platforms would become unsupported. It's a case of their being stronger together.
MZ per X (3017) on 3/16/2010 8:49 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] Splitting is ultimately more useful than lumping, but I'm concerned that if we were to split them, many platform-independent browser game software platforms would become unsupported. It's a case of their being stronger together. [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] Valid point. That's why I'd only go for separation of the "most successful" platforms, with Flash being king of the hill with its tens of thousands of games. And when I look at Parchment's front page alone, I could very well imagine separating this out, too.
And better separate sooner than later, imagine more people show up adding small Flash games, then we'll have a problem compared to which separating PC98 looks like toddler play. :o)
Sciere (930490) on 3/16/2010 9:01 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
It's important to note that the site has always favoured a platform-approach over a technology-approach. In the past new technologies for existing platforms have not always warranted a new platform, but were incorporated through tech specs.
The browser platform was a huge (and necessary) breakthrough to widen our scope, but the basic principle remains that the browser as a platform to play the game is the basic element, with the technology applied to it (the plug-in installed on the platform) detailed in the tech specs. The only (and fortunate) reason we are not calling it Windows, Macintosh, Linux or mobile games is because a large part is platform independent (could technically also be played on a Wii, PS3, ...)
Splitting up Flash is not a good idea in that regard. As to how operating systems and technology are handled in regard to browser games, more can be read in a previous discussion.
MZ per X (3017) on 3/16/2010 9:13 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Sciere wrote--] Splitting up Flash is not a good idea in that regard. As to how operating systems and technology are handled in regard to browser games, more can be read in a previous discussion. [/Q --end Sciere wrote--] Approvers only. bangs his head against a nearby wall
MZ per X (3017) on 3/17/2010 9:51 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Sciere wrote--]We need some help in the browser queue, interested? [/Q --end Sciere wrote--] While it is very tempting to become an approver, I don't think it would work out well. For Mobygames I'd be just another approver with way too less time on his hands, and for me it would be even more work that I'd like to dive in, but couldn't. All the contributions I'm constantly postponing are sad enough.
So I must respectfully decline, but thank you.
Zeppin (8408) on 3/18/2010 2:22 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start MZ per X wrote--] [Q2 --start Sciere wrote--] Splitting up Flash is not a good idea in that regard. As to how operating systems and technology are handled in regard to browser games, more can be read in a previous discussion. [/Q2 --end Sciere wrote--] Approvers only. bangs his head against a nearby wall [/Q --end MZ per X wrote--] For the convenience of regular users interested in the prior discussion I've uploaded screenshots (in the "flat" forum view) of it which can be viewed here:
MZ per X (3017) on 3/18/2010 8:22 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Sciere wrote--]The browser platform was a huge (and necessary) breakthrough to widen our scope, but the basic principle remains that the browser as a platform to play the game is the basic element, with the technology applied to it (the plug-in installed on the platform) detailed in the tech specs. [/Q --end Sciere wrote--] Okay, understood, I'll hold back my Flash separation revolution for now. :o) But cases like Z-Code stay fundamentally unsolved.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/19/2010 4:13 AM · Permalink · Report
Cases like Z-code have been at an impasse for years here and will remain that way until more people start vocally caring about them.
A systematic dismantling of the "issues" involved with documenting platform-independent software (or "software platforms") might go some length toward settling not only this old beef but plenty of other obscure side cases I gripe about much less 8)
MZ per X (3017) on 3/19/2010 9:21 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] A systematic dismantling of the "issues" involved with documenting platform-independent software (or "software platforms") might go some length toward settling not only this old beef but plenty of other obscure side cases I gripe about much less 8) [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] IMHO an important step would be drafting a policy that draws an acceptable line between software platforms and pure emulators, if that's possible at all. Still thinking about this, but not sure if my technical background knowledge is sufficient.
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95233) on 3/19/2010 4:44 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start MZ per X wrote--] IMHO an important step would be drafting a policy that draws an acceptable line between software platforms and pure emulators, if that's possible at all. Still thinking about this, but not sure if my technical background knowledge is sufficient. [/Q --end MZ per X wrote--] Couldn't we simply exclude "software platforms" (IE emulators) where the primary purpose is to run software originally designed for another dedicated or established platform, as opposed to being a platform that software is designed for in and of itself? People design games for SCUMM and Z-Code, they don't design games for Gens or PCSX.
MZ per X (3017) on 3/19/2010 8:27 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start djsquarewave wrote--] Couldn't we simply exclude "software platforms" (IE emulators) where the primary purpose is to run software originally designed for another dedicated or established platform, as opposed to being a platform that software is designed for in and of itself? People design games for SCUMM and Z-Code, they don't design games for Gens or PCSX. [/Q --end djsquarewave wrote--] Yeah, something like this, but it needs to be more specific somehow. Just for example: your wording would exclude ScummVM. Or did you leave out the "VM" intentionally?
I'd rather go for some math. Let's assume there are 50 home-brewed games for SNES emulators that never saw a release on cartridge for the real hardware (maybe wouldn't even work on real hardware). And - judging by Wikipedia - there are some 1,500 games ever officially released for this platform.
1) We could say that if there are more than 20 home-brewed games we couldn't list otherwise, then SNES (emulation) becomes a new platform.
2) Or we could look at the ratio between home-brewed and officially released games, in my example this ratio would be 3,23 per cent (50*100% / (1500+50) ). If this ratio is above, say, one per cent, then SNES (emulation) becomes a new platform.
This math would require some deep research, but which new platform doesn't? But we could stick to hard facts and wouldn't have to interpret some more or less subjective policy.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/20/2010 6:30 AM · Permalink · Report
Heck, I'd be content here just to document the games as normal but mention at the end of the description: "this game was never distributed on physical media and can only be run under emulation, not functioning correctly on physical hardware." Bingo, bango, the distinction the purists want drawn -- clearly and explicitly stated! But they'll still be unhappy it even turns up in the listings.
Zeppin (8408) on 3/20/2010 7:37 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]Heck, I'd be content here just to document the games as normal but mention at the end of the description: "this game was never distributed on physical media and can only be run under emulation, not functioning correctly on physical hardware." Bingo, bango, the distinction the purists want drawn -- clearly and explicitly stated! But they'll still be unhappy it even turns up in the listings. [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] A shame that we don't have the ability to deliberately exclude certain search results in the Game Browser, as such we would simply be able to add that to the description and then, additionally, add a (superficial) tech-spec or "Other Attributes" genre to the game. Then people searching for random SNES games wouldn't get excited for a game that was never actually released for the hardware.
An "Other Attributes" genre option for special edition releases and compilations would then also be able to be excluded, solving an often complained of issue.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/20/2010 4:44 PM · Permalink · Report
So really, many of our objections and reservations could be rolled back with a little additional game browser functionality? Maybe that's where we should focus our efforts.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/16/2010 10:33 PM · Permalink · Report
Flash being king of the hill with its tens of thousands of games. And when I look at Parchment's front page alone, I could very well imagine separating this out, too.
The Flash "platform" started here as a game group for Windows executables of Flash games. Get an inch then take a yard!
As for Parchment, there's no need to make that a platform -- it already is one, the Z-Machine. One that won't go live in Mobygames until it's a cold day in Hell 8)
Foxhack (32100) on 3/16/2010 4:10 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start MZ per X wrote--]And if you see it that way than there is no reason why Z-Code, BASIC or maybe even ScummVM shouldn't be added as a software platform.[/Q --end MZ per X wrote--]ScummVM should not be added as a platform. That's akin to adding console emulators as single entries; ScummVM is not a game, it's a tool to play games on all sorts of different hardware.
Adding ScummVM would be like adding every single program that runs text adventures solely because it can run text adventures. (Not saying text adventures don't have a place here; in my opinion, they do, but the programs used to run them do not, since they can do nothing without the data files.)
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/16/2010 4:16 PM · Permalink · Report
Also, SCUMMVM is more like MAME than like an emulator, since it is a collection of emulators.
(And, notably, though the emulator supports the games, with only a couple of bundled exceptions, none of the games were made with the intent to be played natively through SCUMMVM. Except for the proof-of-concept OpenQuest port 8)
Foxhack (32100) on 3/16/2010 4:18 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]Also, SCUMMVM is more like MAME than like an emulator, since it is a collection of emulators.
(And, notably, though the emulator supports the games, with only a couple of bundled exceptions, none of the games were made with the intent to be played natively through SCUMMVM. Except for the proof-of-concept OpenQuest port 8) [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]If OpenQuest was released with ScummVM on certain platforms then it can be added... but if only data files were released then it can't be added.
For now...
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/16/2010 10:31 PM · Permalink · Report
Oh, anyone who wants to add OQ can submit it as a Windows game, since it was originally made and released for the AGS (and hm, then I notice that Sciere has actually already added it years ago with no mention of its subsequent porting to the SCUMMVM platform 8)
Of course if it was released bundled with an interpreter then it would be filed under the platform the interpreter was for -- I was talking about it as a native game expressly intended for the SCUMMVM platform 8)
MZ per X (3017) on 5/15/2010 4:27 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]...and the BBC micro whose absence stymied my first game submission in 2004 (the Imogen remake) and still is no closer to hitting prime time six years later!... [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] BBC Micro is live - now you can do all those things you wanted to do in your youth... 8-)
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95233) on 3/14/2010 7:40 AM · Permalink · Report
Considering what I know about how the administration systems here work, I can't see any reason that it would be possible for everything to be moved over with a correction for each game, but not possible for anything to be moved over without using the correction submission system. I don't see any reason, beyond the admittedly significant time investment necessary, that an administrator couldn't do it by hand. Hell, like I said before I'm perfectly willing to do it myself, if the powers that be would make the allowance! I won't touch anything else, and then they can remove the access again as soon as I've finished!
And two years? In MobyTime™, that's nothing. It's not that I'm impatient. I just don't see anything happening at all, and waiting around isn't going to do anything. If I can know that there's honestly something going on to finally address issues like this, then I'll be perfectly happy to wait patiently until it looks like the gears have seized once more. If I could know for sure that this issue would be addressed within two years, I'd be ecstatic! I'd know something was happening, however slow it may be going. But I don't see anything going on beyond brushing the issue aside and making vague promises (where are Oleg's new platforms that were supposed to be added two months ago?).
Instead, we get new platforms like the Blackberry which, while not only being not really a gaming device, is also an example of trying to keep up with the new which is entirely not our stated goal. I can understand adding it as a platform, and I completely agree that it has a place here, but I can't understand its addition in the face of what seem to be much greater holes in the database that we should be trying to fill.
...it's amazing how passionate someone can get about data entry and archival, ain't it? :P
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 3/14/2010 7:57 AM · Permalink · Report
Instead, we get new platforms like the Blackberry which, while not only being not really a gaming device, is also an example of trying to keep up with the new which is entirely not our stated goal. I can understand adding it as a platform, and I completely agree that it has a place here, but I can't understand its addition in the face of what seem to be much greater holes in the database that we should be trying to fill.
I'm with you, brother :) But what can we do? Adding new platforms depends entirely on Corn Popper, and he is harder to contact than the Pope.
If we do get a new PC-98 platform, I'm going request admin access for it myself, that's a good idea, and I'm stealing it from you :)
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95233) on 3/14/2010 8:46 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Unicorn Lynx wrote--]If we do get a new PC-98 platform, I'm going request admin access for it myself, that's a good idea, and I'm stealing it from you :) [/Q --end Unicorn Lynx wrote--] Unfortunately, I doubt the current admins would be up for this idea, even if if was for such a limited purpose. I asked about this once, as I wanted access to adding developer aliases, and was basically told that things like that can't be selectively added like approver access can. End result was that I added about two dozen and then stopped because of the delays involved. I'm sure you'd be more likely to get a yes than I would, though. ;) I imagine doing it this way would still be incredibly tedious, but at least it would actually get done!
Sciere (930490) on 3/14/2010 12:05 PM · Permalink · Report
Moving them wouldn't be a lot of work. It would simply be a matter of submitting an additional (yet unexisting PC-98) platform to the existing DOS entries and rejecting the DOS one. One hour tops for all those games when I have a list of all the titles.
The reason it isn't being added is that based on all the discussions we had about the platform, I don't have the feeling there is a consensus that PC-98 as a new platform is the best way to go. Pros and cons go back and forth and that's the reason it's in limbo right now.
formercontrib (157510) on 3/14/2010 12:42 PM · Permalink · Report
Localized Windows + DOS versions run wonderful, but that's not the point. I would prefer several other platforms here before this C-Bus-Babe.
But one argument imo - looks like noone had this when thinking about adding PC-88/98 is, we do have ALMOST NO JAPANESE (and Asia) members here contributing much stuff, perhaps it will happen here something after adding it. This would be for me - A REALLY IMPORTANT point to see this platform here, not so much for it's "suspicious" C-Bus hardware, not so much for the tons of japanese anime porn stuff (Unicorn has always one hand at his junk while submitting them for Moby)... but if it will help to get more Asian/Japanese members here - adding did it's job...
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 3/14/2010 2:07 PM · Permalink · Report
But one argument imo - looks like noone had this when thinking about adding PC-88/98 is, we do have ALMOST NO JAPANESE (and Asia) members here contributing much stuff, perhaps it will happen here something after adding it.
Why would it happen? We document most of the Japanese console systems. Even Japanese-only ones, such as WonderSwan or PC-FX. Did it help? Not at all.
We've added tons of Japanese-only games. We definitely have a much more complete database of Japanese-only stuff than any other non-Japanese site. And yet no, or almost no Japanese have helped us with that.
There might be tons of reasons for that, but language barrier seems to be the chief reason.
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 3/14/2010 2:02 PM · Permalink · Report
The reason it isn't being added is that based on all the discussions we had about the platform, I don't have the feeling there is a consensus that PC-98 as a new platform is the best way to go. Pros and cons go back and forth and that's the reason it's in limbo right now.
Let me sum them up again:
PROS:
1) Graphics and sound hardware of PC-98 is different from the one of IBM PC
2) PC-98 has a huge library of Japanese-only games
3) DOS/V (Japanese DOS running on IBM PC) versions of some games may be different from PC-98 versions
4) Tradition and consistency with other game-documenting sites, none of which lists PC-98 games under DOS
CONS:
1) PC-98 games require Japanese DOS, which is the same operation system as Western DOS
2) Processors, memory, and media of PC-98 computers is the same as of IBM PC
3) PC-98 can be considered equivalent to Western DOS historically
4) Certain Japanese sites use the terms "DOS" and "PC-98" interchangeably
I can't think of other pros and cons - just review them and make a decision, because it's up to you (as in, you, the admins) to pass a final judgment. All I can do is supply information - as well as personal recommendation to make it a separate platform.
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95233) on 3/14/2010 6:09 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Unicorn Lynx wrote--] 3) DOS/V (Japanese DOS running on IBM PC) versions of some games may be different from PC-98 versions [/Q --end Unicorn Lynx wrote--] I know I said this in the very first post of this thread, but I would like to reiterate: If we leave PC-98 mixed in with DOS, then these games will bar-none never be documented.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/14/2010 7:07 PM · Permalink · Report
1) PC-98 games require Japanese DOS, which is the same operation system as Western DOS 2) Processors, memory, and media of PC-98 computers is the same as of IBM PC
Our having Windows 3.x as a separate platform despite running on the same hardware base as MS-DOS completely invalidates these points. Suddenly the pros column is twice as big as the cons.
(Really, if we can have the Dragon and CoCo be different platforms, we can do the same for MS-DOS and PC-98.)
Indra was here (20755) on 3/14/2010 7:08 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Unicorn Lynx wrote--]I don't have the feeling there is a consensus that PC-98 as a new platform is the best way to go. Pros and cons go back and forth and that's the reason it's in limbo right now.
PROS:
1) Graphics and sound hardware of PC-98 is different from the one of IBM PC
CONS:
2) Processors, memory, and media of PC-98 computers is the same as of IBM PC [/Q --end Unicorn Lynx wrote--] Analyzing data.
Adding additional data from wiki: The PC98 is different from the IBM PC in many ways; for instance, it uses its own 16 bit C-Bus instead of the ISA bus; BIOS, I/O port addressing, memory management, and graphics output are also different. However, localized MS-DOS or Windows will still run on PC-9801s.
I believe the problem actually lies that we do not have a consensus on "how different" the hardware should be to for it to be established as a new platform? , However, further analysis from the other voices in my head. I believe that in accordance to past precedents in MobyGames, a platform is only relevant if a game was released specifically for that platform.
Thus, my logic interprets the following conclusion:
If games were commercially (read=or officially, means tech support, the works) released only for PC-98, then it deserves a new platform. I cannot think of any other reasoning in accordance to MG policy.
[edit] Under this analysis, the following analogy applies: if some bloke on Jupiter for some amazing coincidence created a platform that coincidently has similar hardware to PlayStation 3, can run on the same CD/DVD, hell, everything is the same expect the title and it was officially released by the Jupiter colony, and has a bunch of games specifically for it, but only the name is different...
It's a new platform.
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 3/15/2010 3:27 AM · Permalink · Report
Like I said, guys, I can only sum up pros and cons, not pass a final judgment. Personally, I also think that it's better for PC-98 to be a separate platform. But you and I both know that all these discussions amount to squat. We can weigh the cons against the pros a thousand times, but in the end it's only one pro that matters: the decision of Corn Popper.
Since Sciere said he can't add new platforms on his own, I think the best way would be for Sciere to pass his decision based on the pros and cons listed here, and - should his judgment be to add PC-98 - ask Corn Popper for confirmation.
Sciere (930490) on 3/15/2010 7:08 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
Good idea, that's what I'll do. I'm going to think this over, the differences between PC and PC-98, comparing how past decisions for different platforms have been decided upon. The case of Windows 3.x isn't a good one, because it isn't about moving on to a new generation of technology.
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95233) on 3/15/2010 7:32 AM · Permalink · Report
I'm glad that deliberation on this is finally happening. I, and others I'm sure, eagerly await your decision, whatever it may be. :)
Terok Nor (42013) on 3/15/2010 8:33 AM · Permalink · Report
I must reiterate what I wrote above (also just found I nice German site with some technical background info about the PC-98 and its compatibility). IBM/DOS machines and PC-98s are different machines and not compatible, neither in hardware nor software. Both use an operating system called DOS made by Microsoft, but those are completely different DOSes, with different BIOS calls and everything. They won't run on the other machine. Not to mention that any software that uses direct BIOS or hardware access (like 99% of it) will fail as well, because memory addresses and graphics modes and so on are different.
And for Oleg's argument about same CPU, RAM and media: Macintosh, Atari ST and Amiga also use the same CPU, RAM and media. Nuff said. (One addendum: PC-98 disks are physically the same, but not logically: their format is not readable in a standard PC drive).
Patrick Bregger (301035) on 3/15/2010 9:15 AM · Permalink · Report
Could you please link this site? I'm would be interested in reading it.
Patrick Bregger (301035) on 3/15/2010 10:00 AM · Permalink · Report
Thank you!
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 3/15/2010 12:50 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Great, this site has a better listing of PC-98 tech specs that I could find in English language.
Listing processor requirements and media types would be no problem now.
I'm still looking for a comprehensive account of PC-98 sound hardware. So far I've found only PC beeper, FM Sound, and PCM Sound; but there must be others.
Graphics is luckily no problem, because PC-98 had on-board graphics only. No CGA, EGA, or any such stuff.
Foxhack (32100) on 3/15/2010 1:32 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Unicorn Lynx wrote--]I'm still looking for a comprehensive account of PC-98 sound hardware. So far I've found only PC beeper, FM Sound, and PCM Sound; but there must be others.[/Q --end Unicorn Lynx wrote--]Sound Blaster.
But this was limited to one model, the PC-9801-118 (source).
Also, there should be a distinct mention of the OS needed. I have a copy of Windows 98 for PC-98. And it looks like it had games for it too. Should I add the included games? :P
vedder (70822) on 3/15/2010 1:37 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
If you put both DOS for PC-98 and Windows 98 for PC-98 under the "PC-98" platform. You might wonder if we shouldn't do the same thing for DOS/Windows... (Which would certainly solve our problems with DOSBox re-releases and mid-90s games which run DOS games in Windows frames and/or installers)
(But of course there's no-one who would volunteer to move over 5000 games...)
Игги Друге (46653) on 5/29/2010 2:26 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start vedder wrote--]If you put both DOS for PC-98 and Windows 98 for PC-98 under the "PC-98" platform. You might wonder if we shouldn't do the same thing for DOS/Windows... (Which would certainly solve our problems with DOSBox re-releases and mid-90s games which run DOS games in Windows frames and/or installers) [/Q --end vedder wrote--]
Of course that is the logical thing to do. The DOS/PC booter/Windows3/Windows distinction is just a remains from the PC-only beginnings of Mobygames. We treat the Mac as one single platform, even though it has changed both CPU (twice!) and operating systems in the course of its life. We don't separate Amiga games which boot from disk from those which run in a window.
The notion that MS-DOS is a platform in itself is silly, since the only games which actually use MS-DOS to run are primitive text adventures and possibly QBasic Gorillas. All other use DOS as a boot-loader and are essentially the same thing as a "PC booter" game. MS-DOS, unlike Windows, has no services that are useful to games, so its use on several unrelated platforms is no reason to lump them together.
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95233) on 3/15/2010 4:43 PM · Permalink · Report
My experience has shown that there are three different modes for games, though I don't know how the hardware factors into it, exactly. They are:
Beep (PC speaker only)
OPN (3xFM + PSG)
OPNA (6xFM + PSG + PCM) -- basically the same as a Mega Drive
Several emulators have options for the sound hardware, and from what I've seen games will default to OPN unless OPNA is available and supported. Like I said, I'm not sure what the upgrades are, but it's possible to have 6 channels FM + PSG + PCM all going simultaneously if the right hardware is present.
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 3/15/2010 9:24 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
Then it's settled I guess. PC-98 must be a different platform.
The hardest part would be to provide tech specs; are there some on that German site you mention? I couldn't find an English site with a good list of tech specs.
And by the way, I really think we should change the name of the platform "DOS" to "IBM PC: DOS" or something. Otherwise it would be confusing. As the example of PC-98 shows, MS-DOS is not an IBM PC-exclusive operation system.
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 3/15/2010 12:42 PM · Permalink · Report
PC-98 is also a PC :) The words "IBM compatible" should be there all right.
formercontrib (157510) on 3/15/2010 12:52 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Unicorn Lynx wrote--]PC-98 is also a PC :) The words "IBM compatible" should be there all right. [/Q --end Unicorn Lynx wrote--]
But the Tandy, one of the first more or less IBM PC compatibles should then appear too ;) - because many old games support it too... let's say:
IBM/Tandy compatible
then should it be ;) - on the other side - for the games that aren't Tandy compatible we should it split then into 2 new platforms
IBM compatible
and
IBM/Tandy compatible
MUHAHAAAAAA ;)
formercontrib (157510) on 3/15/2010 1:49 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start vedder wrote--]I'm referring to PC-DOS, the precursor to MS-DOS. Or is the the DOS on PC-98 also called PC-DOS? [/Q --end vedder wrote--]
I won't do this, because early versions of both os'es are different, not only in content, but more important in version-no., and now that we have - since a few months - the ability to add the concrete version a game requires at least, this could be confusing.
I see no problem having 2 platforms, 1 called: PC-98 and 1 called: DOS.
Okay DOS up to Windows, and all the things around it Browser, Linux etcpp. are named here for the OS they use - all other platforms we have are based on the hardware name.
Perhaps we can think about something, but i'm afraid that's getting to long, for this platform hardware-based too ... for example NEC-9800 (based) or so...
Indra was here (20755) on 3/15/2010 6:32 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
I love when nerds get together and talk about stuff I haven't the foggiest idea about. Nice to know the ball is finally rolling.
WhIP
Push you nerds, push!
I support the name change. To avoid possible tech arguments and flaming by PC-98 fanbois. :p
Игги Друге (46653) on 5/29/2010 2:15 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Sciere wrote--]The reason it isn't being added is that based on all the discussions we had about the platform, I don't have the feeling there is a consensus that PC-98 as a new platform is the best way to go. Pros and cons go back and forth and that's the reason it's in limbo right now. [/Q --end Sciere wrote--] Everyone with some insight into the PC-98 platform knows it's a separate platform.
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95233) on 5/29/2010 8:50 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Sciere wrote--]It's the next one to be added now. [/Q --end Sciere wrote--] !!
Huzzah!
Игги Друге (46653) on 5/29/2010 11:35 PM · Permalink · Report
That's fabulous news, assuming the next platform is added this year. I'm not very interested in PC-98 myself (PC-88 is more interesting), but it's urgent in order to stop database pollution.
Foxhack (32100) on 3/16/2010 4:17 PM · Permalink · Report
I was looking at some DVDs a few days ago and noticed that several had "DVD-ROM games". I read the fine print and they said that they were browser-based games, usually running on Internet Explorer and via some included InterActual software. The software itself appears to be discontinued since 2007 (but I may be mistaken, that's the latest one mentioned on their website.)
The games are browser based, but, they use Windows-specific software routines (e.g. ActiveX). Apparently there's a Mac OSX version, too. If I were to add these, would I add them as browser games, or Windows / Mac games?
Kabushi (261212) on 3/16/2010 4:21 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
We have Battlefield Heroes as browser despite it requiring Windows to run.
And I think the InstantAction games are Windows only too.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/16/2010 4:18 PM · Permalink · Report
If there's an OS-specific middleman between putting the disc in and playing the game, then that middleman is how it currently gets filed regardless of the technology that ultimately delivers the goods to the screen.
chirinea (47495) on 3/17/2010 1:57 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]If there's an OS-specific middleman between putting the disc in and playing the game, then that middleman is how it currently gets filed regardless of the technology that ultimately delivers the goods to the screen. [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]The problem is that we're getting more than one middleman, and it seems to me that MZ per X solution is to add the "closer-to-the-game" middleman as the platform. Here's what I have on mind:
Game goes on Master System = Master System is the platform.
Game goes on Windows which goes on PC Hardware = Windows is the platform.
Browser goes on (whatever OS) which goes on (whatever hardware) = Browser game.
So what he proposes is:
Game goes on Flash which goes on (whatever OS) which goes on (whatever hardware) = Flash game.
But as others have pointed out, this "closer thing to the game" platform approach would put us in an embarrassing situation of adding emulators as platforms possibly. So the problem seems to be that we already have a precedent since we started using OSs as platforms. The conclusion then is... what was I saying again? =P
MZ per X (3017) on 3/17/2010 9:41 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start chirinea wrote--]
Game goes on Master System = Master System is the platform.
Game goes on Windows which goes on PC Hardware = Windows is the platform.
Browser goes on (whatever OS) which goes on (whatever hardware) = Browser game.
So what he proposes is:
Game goes on Flash which goes on (whatever OS) which goes on (whatever hardware) = Flash game. [/Q --end chirinea wrote--]
Precisely. Regarding this issue, I wonder if one can play all those Windows games on an Intel Mac with Windows installed? Agent 5, please?
[Q --start chirinea wrote--] But as others have pointed out, this "closer thing to the game" platform approach would put us in an embarrassing situation of adding emulators as platforms possibly. [/Q --end chirinea wrote--] There must be, however, a policy possible to exclude those. Something that relates to this somehow. Must think through it a bit. :o)
Zeppin (8408) on 3/18/2010 1:11 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start MZ per X wrote--]Precisely. Regarding this issue, I wonder if one can play all those Windows games on an Intel Mac with Windows installed? Agent 5, please? [/Q --end MZ per X wrote--]Yes, you can. Games will run equally well on a PC running Windows as on a Mac running Windows - there are no significant differences between the hardware that would place any limitations on what games can and cannot be played on a dual booting Mac.
Emulators such as Parallels, however, are a different story.
chirinea (47495) on 3/18/2010 2:21 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start MZ per X wrote--]
[Q2 --start chirinea wrote--]
Game goes on Master System = Master System is the platform.
Game goes on Windows which goes on PC Hardware = Windows is the platform.
Browser goes on (whatever OS) which goes on (whatever hardware) = Browser game.
So what he proposes is:
Game goes on Flash which goes on (whatever OS) which goes on (whatever hardware) = Flash game. [/Q2 --end chirinea wrote--]
Precisely. Regarding this issue, I wonder if one can play all those Windows games on an Intel Mac with Windows installed? Agent 5, please? [/Q --end MZ per X wrote--]But regarding Flash specifically: is it really a platform? I mean, isn't it a programing language? If we treat it as a platform, why not treating AGS for instance as a platform also?
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/18/2010 6:11 AM · Permalink · Report
Software platforms are platforms, definitely -- Flash and AGS are platforms like BASIC is a platform, Pascal, C, C+, and the rest. And software platforms are ones that the administration here has largely chosen to exclude (or rather, to primarily track via game groups and tech specs.)
Indra was here (20755) on 3/18/2010 8:21 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]Software platforms are platforms, definitely -- Flash and AGS are platforms like BASIC is a platform, Pascal, C, C+, and the rest. And software platforms are ones that the administration here has largely chosen to exclude (or rather, to primarily track via game groups and tech specs.) [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] BASIC is a tech spec. sniff
Flash games should be too!
Tech spec: Browser.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/19/2010 4:18 AM · Permalink · Report
BASIC is a tech spec. sniff
For all platforms with BASIC implementations? (And is there adequate distinction between different BASICs, like BASICA, GW-BASIC, QBASIC and QuickBASIC all for MS-DOS?)
Flash games should be too!
Maybe a start would be renaming and revamping the "Executable Flash games" group?
(Flash already is a Browser tech spec, isn't it?)
Foxhack (32100) on 3/19/2010 5:53 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]Maybe a start would be renaming and revamping the "Executable Flash games" group?[/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]You mean the games that don't require Flash to be installed in any way shape or form, and therefore not pure Flash, but an interpreter program that loads and runs a Flash applet contained within itself... like the Infocom z-code games?
The ones purely set in the DOS platform? :P
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 3/19/2010 6:10 AM · Permalink · Report
like the Infocom z-code games?
The ones purely set in the DOS platform? :P
You lost me here -- z-code had interpreters for pretty much all home computers. (Or is this sarcasm? I thought that Indra's comment might have been sarcasm also. Confusing!)
Foxhack (32100) on 3/19/2010 6:51 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] like the Infocom z-code games?
The ones purely set in the DOS platform? :P
You lost me here -- z-code had interpreters for pretty much all home computers. (Or is this sarcasm? I thought that Indra's comment might have been sarcasm also. Confusing!) [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]I meant the original releases which included their own interpreter, years before anyone even thought of making their own z-code games which could be played on whatever interpreter they want to use.
There are flash games that run within their own self-contained executables, which should not be added to a theoretical Flash platform, because they usually come bundled with their own standalone Flash interpreter for whatever platform the game may be for (Windows or Mac). Flash games that come as SWF and HTML files should be added to the browser platform.
Games that run straight off a SWF file and do not require an HTML file to run in a browser, AND games that run using Adobe / Macromedia's Flash Player (but not within a browser - dunno if such a thing exists) should have their own platform. But the question is, are there enough games to warrant such a platform?
(Sorry, no sarcasm was meant with my original reply. Just some irony.)
Indra was here (20755) on 3/19/2010 10:19 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote-- [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] Don't worry. That makes two of us. :p
[edit] I seem to have trouble identifying a ground rule of logic or basic philosophy when it comes to new platforms, separate game entries, etc. The logic often collides, even more than often, no actual philosophy exists.
Which is why we all go berserk every time a new issue comes up. Yes, it is confusing.
MegamanX64 (16003) on 3/24/2010 5:16 PM · Permalink · Report
Here's some inspiration for new platforms:
PC World: The 10 worst video game systems of all time.html
:-)
formercontrib (157510) on 3/24/2010 5:26 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start MegamanX64 wrote--]Here's some inspiration for new platforms:
PC World: The 10 worst video game systems of all time.html
:-) [/Q --end MegamanX64 wrote--]
Good to know that we have only 4 of them in our database - if i counted correctly. Some of those look really crappy ;)
Rola (8483) on 3/29/2010 12:39 PM · Permalink · Report
Just found out that one of my games was also released on Acorn Archimedes. I couldn't find this platform here... and there are games for it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Acorn_Archimedes_games
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95233) on 5/15/2010 10:01 PM · Permalink · Report
For anyone who hasn't noticed: the BBC Micro has been added and is now live! Yay!
formercontrib (157510) on 5/15/2010 10:09 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start djsquarewave wrote--]For anyone who hasn't noticed: the BBC Micro has been added and is now live! Yay! [/Q --end djsquarewave wrote--]
And that's not all: it overhauled no less than 13 platforms so far and is already part of the inofficial Top 80 Moby-Platforms :) ... we should think about renaming it into BBC Macro ! ;)
formercontrib (157510) on 5/17/2010 10:28 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Aaah, a few quite minutes, platforms i would like to see in the (hopefully not so far) future:
Commodore C16 / Plus 4
Commodore VC20
Fujitsu FM 7x
NEC PC-88/PC-98
Acorn Archimedes
Fujitsu FM Towns
Sharp X68000
Arcade Coin-Ops
Only 8 platforms - It's a snap ;) don't forget we do have 91 so far on file .... so only 8 more....
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 5/18/2010 7:56 AM · Permalink · Report
Well, Corn Popper promised last November that FM Towns and Sharp x68000 will be added in January 2010, but unless I've been time traveling or accidentally dropped into the Southern hemisphere, it looks pretty damn much like May outside.
The Messiah will probably arrive before those platforms are added.
As for PC-98, last time I heard from Sciere, he was suggesting to Corn Popper to convert all our DOS + Japanese DOS tech spec entries into PC-98 ones. I don't remember exactly when it was, but I'm fairly positive I was wearing winter clothes at the time.
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95233) on 5/18/2010 8:23 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Unicorn Lynx wrote--]Well, Corn Popper promised last November that FM Towns and Sharp x68000 will be added in January 2010, but unless I've been time traveling or accidentally dropped into the Southern hemisphere, it looks pretty damn much like May outside.[/Q --end Unicorn Lynx wrote--] Oddly enough, it has been unseasonably cold and rainy here recently. It sort of feels like I've gone back three months at times...
[Q --start Unicorn Lynx wrote--]As for PC-98, last time I heard from Sciere, he was suggesting to Corn Popper to convert all our DOS + Japanese DOS tech spec entries into PC-98 ones. I don't remember exactly when it was, but I'm fairly positive I was wearing winter clothes at the time. [/Q --end Unicorn Lynx wrote--] Last I heard, he was waiting for an opportunity for him and Corn Popper to seriously discuss the subject. I don't know if that ever happened, but I really hope those discussions haven't stalled. I'm not touching the platform again until something decisive happens...not that I've been that active recently, anyway.
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 5/18/2010 3:46 PM · Permalink · Report
I'm not touching the platform again until something decisive happens...not that I've been that active recently, anyway.
Why not, just keep submitting games if you want. For all we know, it will stay like this forever. And even if it doesn't, it would be as easy (or as hard) to transfer 400 games, for example, as 300.
MasterMegid (723) on 5/19/2010 4:13 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start joyvalley wrote--]Aaah, a few quite minutes, platforms i would like to see in the (hopefully not so far) future:
Commodore C16 / Plus 4
Commodore VC20
Fujitsu FM 7x
NEC PC-88/PC-98
Acorn Archimedes
Fujitsu FM Towns
Sharp X68000
Arcade Coin-Ops
Only 8 platforms - It's a snap ;) don't forget we do have 91 so far on file .... so only 8 more.... [/Q --end joyvalley wrote--]
Holy Hell! Those are all the platforms I was gonna recommend. I realise that it is not easy to so. Particularly arcade coin-ops. Yet, seeing as much of my misspent youth was in arcades I would like to see them on Moby some day. If I had to pick one it would be arcade games. The Commodore's would be next.
Foxhack (32100) on 5/18/2010 6:51 PM · Permalink · Report
Here's another vote for platform independent games:
DVD games.
Not PC or console games... games that run on set-top DVD players or compatible computer software or console hardware. Several famous laserdisc games like Dragon's Lair, Space Ace, and Mad Dog McCree were released in the format; there's also game show uh, games that were released like that.
I proposed a DVD platform ages ago, but it would be easier to implement as "platform independent" with tech specs (DVD player compatible).
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 5/18/2010 8:06 PM · Permalink · Report
The "Choose Your Own Adventure" movie works for those also, and, well, there are more of that sort of thing listed here. A lot of these games were also marketed as Windows / PS2 compatible (of course, running in anything that had a DVD player.)
Tracy Poff (2094) on 5/18/2010 10:31 PM · Permalink · Report
DVD games.
Agreed. I've recently come across one of these in my stacks of games--some sort of promotional 'game' thing released by... Ford? Toyota?... some auto manufacturer. It's a shame we can't document these yet, especially the more worthy examples (i.e. not shameless, soulless advertising).
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 5/18/2010 10:54 PM · Permalink · Report
Self-defeating as this advice sounds, my recommendation would be to document them independently at your own game blog until we catch up, at which point you'll have a big backlog of material to groom and pour in. It would be overstatement to say that people have grown old and died waiting for us to implement changes here at MG, but I hate to think of the chilling effect on the documentation of unsupported platforms.
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 5/19/2010 3:51 AM · Permalink · Report
It would be overstatement to say that people have grown old and died waiting for us to implement changes here at MG
Not sure about death, but I certainly have more gray hair now than when Corn Popper promised me to add FM Towns the first time.
Tracy Poff (2094) on 5/19/2010 4:31 PM · Permalink · Report
Self-defeating as this advice sounds, my recommendation would be to document them independently at your own game blog until we catch up, at which point you'll have a big backlog of material to groom and pour in. It would be overstatement to say that people have grown old and died waiting for us to implement changes here at MG, but I hate to think of the chilling effect on the documentation of unsupported platforms.
I may do that, though when I record games on my blog I rarely put as much information as I would in an entry here--I'm lucky if I get the year and publisher right, and that plus a few screenshots and basic description is pretty much it. If I could put them here I imagine I might be more motivated to find all the information. Well, one can't have everything.
Of course, that requires me to get back to putting things on my blog--I allow myself to get far too distracted by other things to keep it up. Since about a month ago, for example, I'm studying Japanese ("Self", I said, "Japan is the land of video games. Do something with this knowledge."). If I keep my current schedule, I may be documenting obscure Japanese games about this time next year. I guess we'll see how it turns out.
Whatever happens, though, I've no intention of getting rid of any of my collection. It'll all still be there when we finally support the right platforms. I've been here for a few years already, I don't suppose I'm likely to vanish any time soon. One way or another, we'll get these games documented.
Tracy Poff (2094) on 5/27/2010 4:38 AM · Permalink · Report
DVD games.
Just thought I'd add another datapoint, which I'd completely forgotten about last time: visual novels. The VNDB lists over 250 visual novels released on DVD (i.e. DVD player games, not computer/console games on DVD media), and I'm sure that list is far from complete. And, AFAIK, games continue to be released in that format. So, there are more DVD player games than (for example) Atari 7800 and Intellivision games combined.
Gripe, gripe, beg, how nice it would be....
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 5/27/2010 5:22 AM · Permalink · Report
Lip service to the objection I recall is that it would involve cataloguing every make and model of DVD player and all their variations (tech spec -- this particular hypothetical game only works on these kinds of DVD players. Really?)... though if you ask me, DVD implies a cross-manufacturer standard whose variations we wouldn't have to trouble ourselves with.
Tracy Poff (2094) on 5/27/2010 7:19 AM · Permalink · Report
Lip service to the objection I recall is that it would involve cataloguing every make and model of DVD player and all their variations (tech spec -- this particular hypothetical game only works on these kinds of DVD players. Really?)... though if you ask me, DVD implies a cross-manufacturer standard whose variations we wouldn't have to trouble ourselves with.
I'm with you on that. Were there really such DVDs that wouldn't play in all players? I mean, aside from region encoding. A little searching doesn't reveal anything except that some early players didn't actually implement the whole DVD standard, and some players don't support DVD-R. Neither of these seem to be things we'd need to be concerned about. So, we'd want tech specs for region and PAL/NTSC... anything I'm missing that could possibly matter?
Foxhack (32100) on 5/27/2010 7:37 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Tracy Poff wrote--]Were there really such DVDs that wouldn't play in all players?[/Q --end Tracy Poff wrote--]Hiyoooooooooooo.
(Okay, that should be a new platform.)
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 5/27/2010 3:21 PM · Permalink · Report
Nuon
Shouldn't be a big problem given that even if we include unreleased games there are only some 42 to worry about. But thanks for the heads-up!
Tracy Poff (2094) on 5/27/2010 6:44 PM · Permalink · Report
Hiyoooooooooooo.
Huh. I don't really remember hearing about that back then, but then, in 1999, I had an SNES and a Genesis--I didn't even get a PS1 for another year or so. Up to date on gaming developments I was not.
(Okay, that should be a new platform.)
Indeed, another weird new platform we should support.
Was there a list anywhere of platforms we don't support, or just threads like this one?
Patrick Bregger (301035) on 5/19/2010 4:20 PM · Permalink · Report
You know what I'd like to see? Full support for mods. At least for the ones which don't expand the original game but are independent and finished.
But hey, we can tackle this issue right after we support Coin-ops, right?
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 5/19/2010 7:41 PM · Permalink · Report
Does it dilute the database to have coin-op information here? We can split hairs over HOW it's filed, like the current J-DOS / PC-98 workaround, but I don't think there can be much argument over its enriching the database even if handled less than perfectly.
Foxhack (32100) on 5/19/2010 8:11 PM · Permalink · Report
I just don't think that arcade games have a place here.
We already have people who have experienced with the platforms we have on the site. Not so much with arcades, where most of the info will come from MAME. And don't get me started on release infos for every game... or cover art. Or media scans.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 5/19/2010 8:28 PM · Permalink · Report
I just don't think that arcade games have a place here.
Your hunch alone isn't enough to dissuade me 8)
We already have people who have experienced with the platforms we have on the site. Not so much with arcades, where most of the info will come from MAME.
I am extremely confident that the vast majority of our pre-Windows computer game documentation is going on under emulation of some sort. What's the big difference? I've actually logged far more hours in arcades than I have on many of the home computer models I've submitted games for, several of which I've never even encountered in the wild.
And don't get me started on release infos for every game... or cover art. Or media scans.
If an arcade game bears a copyright date and explicitly states its zone of release, that satisfies me for starters. If not -- I'd be happy to loosen the necessity of those criteria a bit, since there are plenty of undated games current policy leaves out in the cold forever.
Difficulty in handling media scans / cover art seems like a trivial factor; if we can't devise a good way of tracking the information, disallow it until we can!
I'd just like something slightly more fine-toothed than the "this game existed in arcade coin-op form" that the coin-op conversion flag gives us.
Foxhack (32100) on 5/19/2010 9:26 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]I am extremely confident that the vast majority of our pre-Windows computer game documentation is going on under emulation of some sort. What's the big difference? I've actually logged far more hours in arcades than I have on many of the home computer models I've submitted games for, several of which I've never even encountered in the wild.[/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]I have nothing against MAME. I meant that the majority of the information will be lifted directly from the MAME project, which is almost completely accurate (save a few errors every once in a while which get fixed after someone submits a complaint). And release infos? What about the thousands of bootleg versions? Will those count as a company? Will the numerous arcade game hacks like the hundreds of Pacman / Street Fighter II hacks count as valid games? What about bootlegs running on different hardware? What about prototype and test versions of games? What about the multiple version upgrades? What about unlicensed console machines that play games from different systems? What about the multiple MAME-based bootleg games?
Frankly, I'd be okay with Arcade as a "platform" if the Admins would finally settle on a bunch of other stuff first, like the other platforms mentioned in this thread including platform independent games, support for more tech specs, database and screenshot watermark bugfixes, and so on.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 5/19/2010 9:46 PM · Permalink · Report
I meant that the majority of the information will be lifted directly from the MAME project, which is almost completely accurate
Then it sounds like it will be enriching indeed!
What about the thousands of bootleg versions? Will those count as a company? Will the numerous arcade game hacks like the hundreds of Pacman / Street Fighter II hacks count as valid games? What about bootlegs running on different hardware? What about prototype and test versions of games? What about the multiple version upgrades? What about unlicensed console machines that play games from different systems?
Barring stand-outs like Ms. Pac-Man, one can only assume that existing policy will hold and these (as with any other mods, hacks or prototypes) would be disallowed.
What about the multiple MAME-based bootleg games?
That's a software-platform issue 8)
Frankly, I'd be okay with Arcade as a "platform" if the Admins would finally settle on a bunch of other stuff first, like the other platforms mentioned in this thread including platform independent games, support for more tech specs, database and screenshot watermark bugfixes, and so on.
I'm not convinced that the adoption of the "arcade" platform need be contingent on all that other business being settled first... are you just saying that you'd prioritize it below those? Frankly I'm happy for any progress -- my hopes cast wide nets here so even if four out of five pet projects remain stalled for the foreseeable future, huzzah: we can celebrate the BBC.
Foxhack (32100) on 5/19/2010 10:23 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]I'm not convinced that the adoption of the "arcade" platform need be contingent on all that other business being settled first... are you just saying that you'd prioritize it below those?[/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]Yes.
There are other things to look into before Arcade. Site issues, new platforms, needed tech specs for the new platform, so on.
I may be overstepping my bounds. But I am tired. Of all this waiting. And nothing ever happening.
Foxhack (32100) on 5/20/2010 12:09 AM · Permalink · Report
Also.
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]Barring stand-outs like Ms. Pac-Man, one can only assume that existing policy will hold and these (as with any other mods, hacks or prototypes) would be disallowed.[/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]
The site shouldn't have exceptions like this. You can't just dismiss an arcade game because it wasn't officially released and / or because it's a bootleg. Guess how many of us grew up playing bootleg games? You can't imagine just how PROMINENT bootlegs have always been in arcades. Like it or not, they're an important part of arcade history...
And as long as the rules stay the way they are, they cannot be in MobyGames.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 5/20/2010 4:01 AM · Permalink · Report
Surely bootlegs were no more prevalent in the arcades than hacked, cracked, pirated warez were on computers. Certainly I would love to see those listed here someday (one of my longest-standing orders of business here is to get the X-rated "Cuntlet" Gauntlet 2 hack represented here somehow) but I think necessarily bundling the proposals together as a simultaneous package deal sinks the proposal. Better to get some in now, then some in later.
For the time being, however, they fall in with mods and hacks. I wouldn't expect an exception on that policy for any other platform for a long time, so why so with coin-ops?
Foxhack (32100) on 5/20/2010 4:22 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]For the time being, however, they fall in with mods and hacks. I wouldn't expect an exception on that policy for any other platform for a long time, so why so with coin-ops? [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]If AtariAge's hacks can be on the site because they were released on a cart, then why not pirated arcade games with modifications? After all, they were -released- by third parties without proper authorization from the official copyright holders for the original game code on original or cloned hardware. Just like AtariAge's hacks.
And yes, bootleg arcade games were prevalent in much of the world. They still are, all over Europe, Asia, and South America, and even in the US of A to a lesser degree. Many people never knew they were playing bootlegs or unauthorized game hacks. They just played.
They're a part of history. You can't ignore them.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 5/20/2010 5:42 AM · Permalink · Report
I'm not arguing for AtariAge's romhacks nor suggesting that these games weren't prevalent. I'd be happy for a moratorium on the cart-enshrined romhacks (much as exists on Z-code games, for instance) if it allowed us to start documenting officially-released arcade games, which will presumably be a prerequisite for documenting unauthorizedly-released arcade games. X must exist before you can say "Y is a bootleg of X".
I can understand the desirability of having it all, but I see insisting on all or nothing as needlessly obstructionist -- I'm happy to allow only the camel's head into the tent and sit back as the entire camel ends up there. But the entire camel will never be invited in.
Adzuken (836) on 5/19/2010 8:39 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Foxhack wrote--]I just don't think that arcade games have a place here.
We already have people who have experienced with the platforms we have on the site. Not so much with arcades, where most of the info will come from MAME. And don't get me started on release infos for every game... or cover art. Or media scans. [/Q --end Foxhack wrote--] I'm not sure how we'd go about getting people who have experience with arcades when we don't support their platform.
I haven't been a part of the coin-op discussion, so I'm not sure what has been said, but I feel as a video game database, it's something we should have. Arcades are an important part of the history of video games. The initial goal of home consoles was to bring the arcade experience home. From a research standpoint, it just seems like such a necessity.
I don't really agree that they'd require much in the way of adjusting. A general release date can be taken from the information. A screenshot of the title screen could be used as cover art. What system boards they're on can be put in technical specs. It doesn't have to be a hassle. At least, I don't think so.
vedder (70822) on 5/20/2010 7:22 AM · Permalink · Report
Well techspecs would require a lot of continuous admin work, because it'll be hard to think of all boards beforehand :)
And while I do see Foxhack's point that MobyGames currently primarily documents home/handheld console/pc games so other similar platforms should have priority over a whole new area. There's really no end to them. There's dozens if not hundreds of other very obscure platforms that we could add, ranging from Game & Watch type handheld games to graphical calculators (I played quite some games on the TI-83), to I dunno, microwaves and electronic t-shirts for all I know.
Frankly I believe that Arcade games are waaay more important to document first, because they will generate more traffic for the site because of their popularity. And more traffic, means more contributors, means more submissions, means more coverage.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 5/20/2010 4:20 PM · Permalink · Report
And while I do see Foxhack's point that MobyGames currently primarily documents home/handheld console/pc games so other similar platforms should have priority over a whole new area.
MG started as a PC game documentation site. If we could make the leap from computers to consoles, we can make the leap to arcades.
There's really no end to them. There's dozens if not hundreds of other very obscure platforms that we could add
You bet, and I want to see them all. But the most popular, widely-known and influential ones should come first (well those and the most easy-to-implement ones with very small game libraries 8)
Frankly I believe that Arcade games are waaay more important to document first, because they will generate more traffic for the site because of their popularity. And more traffic, means more contributors, means more submissions, means more coverage.
That's a good point. I always gun for coin-ops as I do for mainframes: because they were where everything started, and without them any historical understanding is incomplete.
Grandy02 (673) on 5/20/2010 6:24 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
What about Eastern Bloc computers? Are there any here at all?
I'd be glad to add games for the East German home computers KC 85/2, KC 85/3 and KC 85/4 (collectively KC 85/2-4, they would count as one platform). No, I didn't grow up during Cold War, but this extremely obscure chapter of video game history fascinates me somehow.
I previously contributed several KC 85 games at the German/English site TheLegacy, and would like to do the same here. But at MobyGames, I wouldn't be limited to "commercially" released games, so I could add a lot more. There are a few hundred KC 85 games available on the Internet that can be played with KC 85 emulators. Virtually all were once privately created by (East) German people, and a few were "commercially" published by the KC 85 manufacturer on the East German market, mostly in compilations. If you want to get an idea what games for this platform looked like, take a look at those screenshots:
MZ per X (3017) on 5/20/2010 7:29 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Grandy02 wrote--]I'd be glad to add games for the East German home computers KC 85/2, KC 85/3 and KC 85/4 (collectively KC 85/2-4, they would count as one platform). No, I didn't grow up during Cold War, but this extremely obscure chapter of video game history fascinates me somehow. [/Q --end Grandy02 wrote--] My first games were home-brewed ones on a KC 85/2, so I'd definitely be in for this.
Somebody bring me Sisko! (8) on 5/20/2010 7:39 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Grandy02 wrote--]Memories.[/Q --end Grandy02 wrote--] Hot Stasi hooker!
Grandy02 (673) on 5/20/2010 7:52 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start FrakesJoe (NSDSP) wrote--] [Q2 --start Grandy02 wrote--]Memories. [/Q2 --end Grandy02 wrote--] Hot Stasi hooker! [/Q --end FrakesJoe (NSDSP) wrote--] I think this graphics program was made by hobbyists after the reunification. The following photo advertising an unrelated East German office computer more likely fits into the East German era ;-) (not that I want to offend this woman in any way):
Pseudo_Intellectual (66362) on 5/20/2010 8:01 PM · Permalink · Report
I would love to see this machine join our ranks but have no idea what would be needed to even start to set the wheels in motion.
New platform wizard -- that's what we need!
MZ per X (3017) on 5/20/2010 8:12 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--]I would love to see this machine join our ranks but have no idea what would be needed to even start to set the wheels in motion. [/Q --end Pseudo_Intellectual wrote--] Technical specs?
lostsoul78 (2146) on 5/21/2010 1:37 PM · Permalink · Report
I would very much like to see the KC added... the KC 85/3 was my first computer.
I would also like to see the Interton VC 4000 added - I have one right here and even some games in their original boxes that I could add.
So - what needs to be done?
David
Grandy02 (673) on 5/21/2010 7:36 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
I'm glad that you appreciate my suggestion, thanks. And of course I'd also support the addition of the Interton VC 4000, we can't be international enough. :-)
I know this is off-topic, but this photo is just too awesome not to be shared:
East German computer ladies in 1987
So many ways to interpret it, such as "On the way to our first LAN party" or "East Germany's first portable computers". XD
Terok Nor (42013) on 5/21/2010 7:55 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Grandy02 wrote--] I know this is off-topic, but this photo is just too awesome not to be shared:
East German computer ladies in 1987
So many ways to interpret it, such as "On the way to our first LAN party" or "East Germany's first portable computers". XD [/Q --end Grandy02 wrote--]
Our microchips were the largest in the world!
MZ per X (3017) on 5/21/2010 8:08 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Grandy02 wrote--] I know this is off-topic, but this photo is just too awesome not to be shared:
East German computer ladies in 1987 [/Q --end Grandy02 wrote--] LOL, you made my day, thanks.
Patrick Bregger (301035) on 5/21/2010 8:24 PM · Permalink · Report
That picture is just awesome.
Havoc Crow (29859) on 5/22/2010 10:55 AM · Permalink · Report
Then there's Pegasus, though I'm not sure if it's different enough from NES to warrant a separate platform (or if it should be in the database at all, considering that its game library is composed pretty much entirely of pirate games.)
Grandy02 (673) on 5/22/2010 11:04 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
Wasn't there also that Dendy in Russia? Anyway, there are so many unlicensed NES/Famicom clones.
EDIT: Wow, if I'm not mistaken, Nintendo's Russian website gave "Dendy" (Денди) a little mention in news related to the Wii release of Punch-Out!!:
Лучший, самый известный, самый любимый симулятор бокса, знакомый многим еще по «Денди» [...]
Patrick Bregger (301035) on 5/22/2010 11:38 AM · Permalink · Report
I want a tech spec for PS3 and Xbox 360 named "3D Glasses". I am currently working on a game entry for G-Force and these two versions offer a 3D mode for usage with said glasses. The PC already has this tech spec - but this version of the game doesn't support it. Hooray!
formercontrib (157510) on 5/28/2010 7:27 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start MZ per X wrote--]WOW - one new platform every two weeks? I could get used to this... [/Q --end MZ per X wrote--]
So pump up the queue, pump it up, come down handsomely girlz+boyz, make my day and flood the queue :)
formercontrib (157510) on 5/28/2010 10:55 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Was that for me ?
That was not negative meant from my side, contrary: Today we get some new covers, and i really hope - our contributors, especially the old schoolers - will fill both (Micro + Electron) platforms asap with life :) ...
Not that have nothing to do actually - really not, but the fact that i grew up with VCS 2600 + C64, and the Acorn's aren't really popular here in Germany those days - but i'm still interested in those machines, heard and read so many good things about in the good ol' days, so i starve for seeing game entries here...
formercontrib (157510) on 5/29/2010 8:59 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start MZ per X wrote--] [Q2 --start joyvalley wrote--]Was that for me ? [/Q2 --end joyvalley wrote--] No, I think it just meant that we won't see a new platform every two weeks in the future. =) [/Q --end MZ per X wrote--]
;) Sorry, i meant Sciere's reply ;)