New Wiki material: software/games

Page 2/7
1 | | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

By mars2000you

Enlighted (6182)

mars2000you's picture

06-03-2018, 14:22

ren: what you are doing is cloning Generation MSX, even if you pretend the contrary.

So, for the people who want to compare what you are doing with my edited version, I've created a 'replacement' page for the Blagger game:

My version is not a cloning of Generation MSX, and that's the main point of this discussion!

We don't need to clone Generation MSX to add pages about only the games with problems or enhancements.

We don't need to precise the company in the title (except if two different games have the same title).

Mentioning the year in the title is not very useful (especially because some games have different release dates, according the brand under which they were released). It's inconsistent with all the other Wiki pages.

By ren

Paragon (1928)

ren's picture

06-03-2018, 14:36

Reaction to above post, other stuff will follow.

Yes, I thought about the need of year/company name. Though I notice company name is added to every HW device.
In this case company should/would be the company that can be deemed to be the 'main' company (the developer and/or prime publisher). In this case: Alligata.

In fact the whole Wiki page could be deemed unnecessary, even your version. Just add all info to the GenMSX page.
I wonder if MRC & Pleyte (GenMSX) ever talked about an integration between both sites?

By mars2000you

Enlighted (6182)

mars2000you's picture

06-03-2018, 14:39

ren wrote:

Though I notice company name is added to every HW device.

Because when an user buys hardware, he wants to have the 'new' Sony, Philips, Panasonic ... computer, joystick, etc...

But when it concerns software, he wants to acquire for example Vampire Killer, The Maze of Galious, Blagger, etc.. because it's the title of the game/application that is more important than the company.

By Grauw

Ascended (10565)

Grauw's picture

06-03-2018, 14:45

I would also not include year and company in the wiki page’s name unless it is necessary for disambiguation. That is also the general practice on e.g. Wikipedia.

Also, in general for maintainability I would say it is preferable to have a single page which lists the differences, rather than four different pages with duplicated content...

By ren

Paragon (1928)

ren's picture

06-03-2018, 14:58

Reaction to earlier stuff:

@rderooy: I get your point.

Though (tight) integration between MRC and Generation MSX is missing. I wonder if both parties ever talked about this?
Gen MSX also has HW pages, but the MRC's wiki pages seem to surpass these, are way more rich/detailed.

There are some SW pages here, but not games (that's considered to be GenMSX's domain).

Funny thing is I've been working myself on a extensive (and quite versatile if I may say so myself Wink) database/site (not limited to MSX however), started over a couple of times, never has seen the light of day.

Then there's also CheatMSX, which, (with all due respect) seems superfluous as well: all that stuff can/could be hosted @ GenMSX (it has in fact a 'cheat' tab).

(But hey, I understand the fun in creating + hosting your own site/database etc. Wink)

@m2kyou: sure, subcategories only make sense when there are enough pages to support them. So it surely wouldn't/shouldn't be a requirement for a company category. But in case of e.g. ASCII it could make sense (though perhaps not if we'll not pursue the creation of many game/sw pages).

Regarding the number of publishers for e.g. Blagger: I would only list it under the Alligata Software category, which I deem the 'main' company (developer, and published it).
Indeed, it's not workable to add them to all, and shouldn't be necessary.

Of course it should be clear that a wiki can't take the place of a relational database, and shouldn't aim to do so. Before all, information, and categories applied, should be sensible.

@Grauw: agreed.

By ren

Paragon (1928)

ren's picture

06-03-2018, 14:57


By wolf_

Ambassador_ (9950)

wolf_'s picture

06-03-2018, 17:55

I want to point out that the MRC wiki should be free for everyone to add articles into. And indeed you could wonder whether the MRC wiki should have a dupe of GenMSX. That's actually a question I can't answer, as such would go against the free nature of a wiki.

The real wikipedia has a bit of a rule that a subject should have a general nature. E.g. it can't be used to 'promote' your local no-name Hillbilly tennisclub and place it in the same category where Wimbledon winners are documented. Because our MSX-scene as a whole is rather dedicated and 'local', you could say that in the end everything is of interest.

At the same time, there's the imdb website, and you could argue that you don't need film pages on wikipedia. Yet there are!

So, this could as well mean that game pages can have their place on the MRC wiki. Not because this must be, but because this can be! Note that I'm writing 'can', not 'should'. No-one should be forced to write such pages here, but at the same time you could debate whether someone should be prevented from doing so.

By rderooy

Paladin (686)

rderooy's picture

06-03-2018, 15:16

Ren: Can you give an example of how MRC and GenMSX should work closer together? I created the {{GENMSX}}, {{GENMSXHW}} and {{GENMSXPUB}} templates on the Wiki here to make it easier to link to GenMSX without breaking the links when there are some updates to the title or developer on GenMSX. And if GenMSX ever has to change hostname for one reason or another a simple update to the templates will fix it for all the entries.

As to GenMSX also having hardware, your right. But most of the hardware Wiki entries here have been created recently. And some of the data used for the Wiki was sourced from GenMSX. Do I see that as an issue? No. For the hardware I do think that a Wiki is more flexible, especially since, on the hardware side, the GenMSX database is rather limited.

By Grauw

Ascended (10565)

Grauw's picture

06-03-2018, 15:39

On VGMRips there is a policy to not include VGMs for systems covered by other websites, e.g. Sega MegaDrive VGMs are not accepted because there is the Project2612 website, and Sega Master System VGMs are on SMSPower. Also SID support is not included in the VGM format because there is already a vibrant SID ripping community, so ripping SID VGMs will just add duplication and consume time from VGM rippers which could be better spent on systems which don’t have that same level of coverage.

I think in general those are good, sensible policies. Given a limited amount of resources in our small communities, it promotes the effective use of people’s time and avoids duplicated work. (This is also where it is different from e.g. the case of Wikipedia vs. IMDB.)

Imo, the same applies here wrt. the MRC wiki and Generation-MSX. It’s best to keep the software entries on the wiki focused on content supplementary to Generation-MSX, to make better use of our time and also to keep high quality information in one place rather than mediocre and fragmented information spread over multiple places.

By gdx

Enlighted (5372)

gdx's picture

06-03-2018, 15:41

Yes, we can put everything about the MSX as all is clearly classified. What Ren puts is good but I doubt we will be large enough to add any commercial software. Ren can continue, it does not bother. The wiki just needs a better classification.

Page 2/7
1 | | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7