RF Generation Message Board

O.K. as we have already stated we need a thread to discuss what what we need to do to get the ball rolling with the hardware section. I feel this will be the most productive way of doing this until we can work out the logistics of getting us all together for a chat-meeting. I've seen that you have put quite a bit of time in latley, Tholly, with new additions and adding photographs, which is excellent now we just need to pull everything together and work out who's going to do what.

I've thought of a few areas, which will need covering:

• New releases U.S. and Europe
• Current Generation Accessories Already released U.S. and Europe
• Older Systems Accessories U.S. and Europe

Now the hard bit. How will we begin to gather the information needed to do this work. In the past I have added the new European games released, to do this I have had magazines to show me what's coming out for the month and also on retail web-sites it pretty much covers all the game releases for the week/ month. Some of these sites such as Amazon and Play also feature hardware, but not in any great quantity. However the information will be readily available if we "shop around" so to speak.

Again current generation stuff is still available from Amazon and other sites so this information can be acquired and added to our database.

It's the older stuff I would have a problem with. Other web-sites list various accessories and hardware on their sites sometimes for retail and sometimes to document, as we are doing here. However there is no definitive answer to it. I have always in the past only ever focussed on games and have never spent any time buying accessories other than Joypads and even there I've mainly only ever bought official ones as they tend to take more of a battering. This is where I was hoping you would both have a little more experience.

So anyway, after bulking up the database we are going to have to start to look at adding some content to the pages. Tholly has already started adding some photos he has done onto some of the pages. I was hoping I could start to do the same thing and you could too, Josh. I also wanted to start adding photos showing consoles/ peripherals from angles people might not expect, such as images showing the back of machines showing cable entry, open PlayStations showing CD entry, the Nintendo Wii's many openings for it's controllers/ SD card etc. This will give a more definitive view of an item and not just some common stock photo, available on any other website. In addition overviews and the like will also have to start being written. This is not an area I am particularly good in, as you can probably tell from my posts, I write the way I speak and coming from the North of England doesn't exactly make for easy reading, especially to people from the US.

I was thinking with overviews we could start with some of the more major consoles ie. SNES, NES, Megadrive/ Genesis, PlayStation as these will undoubtedly be the more popular items people will be both looking at and adding to their collections. If people see these pages they may not be too aware that most of the other pages are empty :o

Anyway lets bounce a few ideas around and see if we can work something out from there. Also if any one else not related to the hardware sections has any suggestions feel free to stick them in this thread, the more input the better. :)

I really like the idea of taking pictures of the output ports of consoles.   I think that we should also list as much of this information as possible in the overview. For example:

Nintendo Wii

{..basic info...}

• 4 Gamecube controller ports [include picture below]
• Digital Outupt - Accepts [link to composite cable entry]composite and [link to component cable entry]component [include picture below]
• etc....

The hard part is not only finding out what to include in the database, but also the details (part #, etc) of said items.  We know that some of the more major items are out there, but what about the little known stuff? Take the NES for example.  I know that there were tons of third party peripherals made, but how are we going to know about  them all?  Research, as you said, would be the way.

That being said, I think that it would be smart to focus on one system at a time.  Once we have what we feel is an adequate amount of info for a system, we move on to next system.  Unlike software, this information hasn't been documented often, so it'll be difficult to tell if we should "move on" or not, but I think that this might be a good way to get started.

Also, do you think that we should include hardware "guides" as well? For example, I modified my US SNES to be able play import releases. This info has been documented on the web in various places, but it'd be nice to have a more complete collection of hardware articles.

Uh... well I just read through that and it didn't make as much sense as when I wrote it... hopefully I had at least one coherent thought in there. :)

Don't worry about not making sense. I usually can't remember what I've written about by the time I get to the bottom of the post.

Anway I thought it would be good also to keep track of what we have done, just to keep every one up to date:

17.1.06 - Added all Nintendo Wii (PAL) accessories listed on Amazon 

I like the idea of the different pictures to show ports. Also don't worry about the overviews sounding bad. If you are talking about a European system why should teh review sound "American"?

I like you ideas as well. A guide how to mod the system could be done in the trivia section or some section we could add if needed.

As far as working on one system at at time that could be both good and bad. I would like to see a lot of different items in the database. If anything I would say add a lot of different consoles then go back and concentrate on one system. For all the NES accessories talk to Pieter. He has over 200 of them and most are boxed. I know he is a freak.

Gotcha, sounds good.

Do we know of anywhere that lists the part # of stuff? I was looking up some gamecube accessories that I know about, and I didn't want to add them without complete information.

Games = Yes

Hardware = No

yea, i added about 200 hardware entries over xmas break....i did add a lot of pictures as well...plus, i have more pictures taken that i didn't add yet....

now that im back at grad. school for the spring semester, im gonna be slowing down, but ill add what i have when i can.....

also, the idea about working on one system at a time....i dont like that idea....sometimes you get info in little parts with a large amount of time in between ( i mean, ive had an NES since i was very young and i am still learning new things about it) so, i say, add what you can, where you can, and expand it out as you learn more about it....

this would keep knowledge on everything expanding, making the site not necessarily the complete end all of info on one thing, but it would at least make us a source of some knowledge on a lot of things...

i added a bunch more hardware pics tonight....thats all the pics that i had taken

i need to take more....

Hey, your doing well. I really need to try and get started, all of my stuff is still at my mums house though, so I really need to try and sort it all out first though.

You just moved and that can be a nightmare so take your time.

Heya!

My personal life shit has died down, and I'd like to get back started on my job of hardware submission.  Do you think that it would be beneficial to set a goal, such as like 20 submissions a week, or 1000 total submisisons by the end of April?  I think that with a goal like this it might be easier to stay focused.

I still also have tons of stuff at home to take pictures of. Maybe I can find some time this week, as it's spring break for me at school.

That sounds like an excellent idea setting targets, even if they are just minor ones. Like yourself I have had various issues to contend with in my life away from the site and hopefully they may be being resolved at the moment. I still won't be able to put as much time in as I have in the past, up until about June anyway, as hopefully I will be receiving a laptop for 10 years loyal service to my works.

Like you said however if we try and focus on getting 1000 hardware entries into the databse by the end of April it will give us some thing to aim for, and keep us clued up on the scripts and everything until I can actually get some time to do some more in depth work on the site.

Before the hardware database entries get too extensive I think we need the guidelines for what should and shouldn't be done to clarify hardware variations.

I've noticed Apolloboy has submitted edited Atari ST entries that cover the dozen or so models of the ST line. Now what exactly is the difference between a hardware entry and a hardware variation in this case?

Before someone goes and approves all of those submissions that were submitted for them wait until this is cleared up first. Here's why I added these as variations of the 520 as opposed to individual entries:

A number of machines were released in the ST family. Here they are, in rough chronological order after the original 520ST:

    * 520ST+ - Name for early 520STs with 1 MiB of RAM, but without floppy disk
    * 260ST - European name for the 520ST with 512 KiB. Used after the release of the 520ST+ to differentiate the cheaper 512 KiB models from the 1 MiB models
    * 520STM - a 520ST with a built-in modulator for TV output
    * 520STFM - a 520STM with a newly redesigned motherboard in a larger case with a built-in floppy disk drive
    * 1040STF - a 520STFM with 1 MiB of RAM and a built-in double-sided floppy disk, but without RF modulator
    * 1040STFM - a 520STFM with 1 MiB of RAM and a built-in double-sided floppy disk with RF modulator
    * Mega ST (MEGA2, MEGA4) - 1040 with 2 or 4 MiB of RAM, respectively, in a much improved "pizza box" case with a detached keyboard. Early models did not include the BLiTTER chip; most did. Included a real-time clock and internal expansion connector.
    * 520STE and 1040STE - a 520STFM/1040STFM with enhanced sound, the BLiTTER chip, and a 4096-color palette, in the older 1040 style all-in-one case


As you can see it's basically the same system with variations in memory, cases or such. I was under the impression that wasn't enough to warrant them being unique entries but variations of the standard 520ST and that's how I submitted them. Check how I added them to the Atari ST database and see if it meets approval. If I'm mistaken and minor details are enough to warrant more than how I've added them already them let me know before I add more. If I'm correct then the mess of submissions awaiting approval has to be dealt with as there is still useful information for the systems outlined even if the titles don't change.

Apolloboy may not realize how the [variation] portion of the title works and that that part of the title signifies a variation on the original 520ST hardware. Those models that are more unique than they are alike to the 520 already have their own listing. If I am wrong then what exactly is the purpose of the variation title?

I agree we need to have guidelines and now is the time before too much is entered.  We did start a similar discussion here http://www.rfgeneration.com/forum/index.php?topic=4276.0 but there wasn't a whole lot of input and we never came to any consensis.  If this goes the same way we may need Scott to just make a call on this so things get entered in a consistent manor.

Yes, guidelines were supposed to be written a long time ago for all departments, but people got side tracked and the general guidelines, which I've asked everyone to look over, have yet to be approved.

It would really make my day if we could have somethings finished by the time RFG 2.0 rolls out, which should be by the beginning of June if all goes well. Guidelines are part of those things. I ask that everyone looks over the general guidelines, and if we can say those are good then please, please, please make the game, hardware, US, Canadian, PAL, Japanese, etc specific guidelines.

The thing with submitting hardware variations right now is the name. Once you choose the hardware your going to submit/add a variation of, the name is locked in. If the variation has a completely different name all you can do is add it to the variation title. Those Atari ST submissions sitting in queue are an example of this.

So I guess what I'm asking is what is more proper? Atari 520ST [1040ST-E] or Atari 1040ST-E ? The proper name is the latter but if it's a variation it can't be displayed that way without further editing after it's already been submitted.

Obviously at this point the members are changing variations to reflect the proper names which is fine by me but there has to be a better way to submit variations. There will be plenty of edits for title changes because although adding them this way is more accurate and technically proper, it doesn't gel well collection-wise on people's lists. When that happens each hardware entry of this type will be double the work and/or time consuming to change what could've been the title at submission.

For those unfamiliar with the ST or other systems with many variations in allot of cases the differences are less than those found between the PS2 and the PSTwo. Retail and collection wise the names on the boxes/packaging do not always reflect what the variations list in the database has. Changing names to better reflect listings is time consuming for both users and staff when it could've been done from the get-go. If it's decided that the current system works then it desperately needs to be added to the FAQ and the members need to be aware of it.

What it boils down to for those ST listing is either I wasted allot of time making variation titles that will just end up being edited anyway or Apolloboy wasted allot of time submitting edits for title changes to reflect what he thought they should be based on retail information and packaging. It would be really good to get this out of the way before the rest of the basic hardware for the bottom half of the list is done before there ends up being dozens more title edit submissions.

I guess the easiest solution is to allow proper retail names in submissions so the latter listed above is entered and won't need to be edited in the future because of confusion as to RFGen's methods or because people look at it and know that it isn't what it says on their box on their shelf.

I've sent a PM to Apolloboy telling him that we're in discussion about variations titles here. They've been in the review list now for a week. Bur rather than just push them through to clean it up I hope this will decided upon soon. I don't want to finish the latter half of the hardware sections and add another 200 hardware entries if half of them will just end up being edited again anyways.  :P

I personally think that the second way you've stated is the correct way to enter the hardware to the database. Whilst it may be a variation of the orginal piece, people won't refer to it as such, they will know it as the latter. There's no point adding entries to the database if they aren't correct. We should adopt a similar stance with hardware entries as we do software and enter them as they are called, not just some ad-hoc hash name which isn't correct. The thing with that though being that some entries are already entered with their true name being entered as a variant, these will need sorting, but I wouldn't have thought it would take too long to sort.

I agree. That would mean of course that the submission script would have to be changed to allow the proper named to be entered the first time around. If the admins/editors agree then we can push these Atari ST ones through and go back through the others and change them as well.

Here is a question...

Why are these different from something such as the PS1 and PSone or DS and DS Lite?

In those cases, they are treated as separate additions, not variations, yet they technically do the same thing? How about the PS2 and slim PS2? They are separate titles, but they play the same games and have different specs. What makes the Atari ST so special that it requires these titles to be added as variations rather than title additions? There is a reason there are console codes, it is so that that like things are grouped together.

To be honest, this should have been decided on by EVERYONE way back when the hardware database was originally set up, but we were lax and it slipped through the cracks. The truth is that right now we have this issue and we need to figure out how to deal with not only this issue but any other issues that come up. This applies for ALL Databases. I've stressed this before and I'll stress it again -- guidelines need to be written and they need to make sense, otherwise we'll have these issues. So, as such, I implore all of you, get to writing these guidelines, clearly they are needed, and they will get rid of these headaches that keep arising. Please start working on these, I beg all of you. Those of you who were asked to write guidelines know who you are. You'll all completely make my day if these are finished by April 28th, 2007, the third birthday of the site and it may be the day RFG 2.0 launches.

The differences between the PS2 and the Slim are big ones. Not only cosmetic and feature oriented but motherboard based, power supply, IR recievers. etc .etc. The differences between the Atari ST listing in question are minimal. Addition of a RF modulator, different case, more memory, but essentially all 520ST's. Those ST's with major differences comparable to PS2-PSTwo already have their own listing.

The big question here is whether or not the titles should reflect this. Should a Atari 520STM (520ST with a modulator built in) be listed as a separate addition from a Atari 520ST or a variation of it as in Atari 520ST [M]? They both have the same exact specs except for the modulator. If it should be a variation should it at least reflect what it would've said on the box or at retail by having it's proper title?

How does a Sears Video Arcade get a separate addition instead of being a variation of a Atari VCS 2600 when it's only major difference is it's label? and yet a Genesis 3 is a variation of a 1601 Model1 Genesis when it's hardware is very different.

I know we don't want to start mix-matching systems based on whoever reviews them and the same goes for members submitting them. So I had asked the original question for the benefit of myself and other staff in reviewing these as much as for the members who are submitting hardware entries in whatever way suits them. I'm sure the guidelines will take care of all this soon enough, but what should be done in the meantime so we don't fly blind until then? And what should be done with the mix-matched entries already present across all systems?

Well we can't change anything until we come up with a standard system of deciding what goes where.  The sooner we do this the sooner we can correct the entries that are nonconforming.  We can switch the ones that are wrong once we decide the guidelines, but I think we need to put out foot down and hammer out the guidelines before we pile up more entries that we don't know what to do with.

At least for now we need a concrete way of determining variations from separate entries.  Having a comittee decide whether the differences are major enough for a separate entry will take too much time and effort and will not be the most professional way to do it.  We need a concrete set of steps that we can say, "if it meet this list of requirements, then it is a variation".  I noted that the DS and DSlite are separate entries, the PS3 with different hard drives are variations, and it looks like the 360s are variations too.

From the programming point of view, the original reason for creating variations was to allow two games to have the same title for the same system.  The variation names in bracketsv were created so that one could determine the differences between two entries in the search results.  This system works for software, but does a different system need to be set up for hardware?  You are suggesting allowing variations to have different names, but then what determines if a game is a variation if it doesn't have the same name?  That was our simple method of determining it for games in the past, but it sounds like for hardware it may be a different story.

What determines if a game is a variation?  Are we basing this on the type of games they work with?  On the hardware specifications?  On the system name?  We need to determine this ASAP so that we can deal with these entries now and correct the problem before it keeps getting worse.

Not sure if everyone would agree with your evaluation of the ST line.  From the first release of the 520ST to the 1040STe there are some (IMHO) huge differences including redesign of the motherboard, integrated P/S, integrated Floppy, integrated RF Modulator, new hardware for sound, video, memory management, native genlock support, and the addition of analog controller ports.  In any event this all just points to the fact that we really need the guidelines written to help take some of the subjectiveness out of the process.

That's not so much my evaluation as it is the impression and loose rules I followed when adding hardware after seeing how others have done it for other systems. Trying to toe the line between what is and what isn't is difficult with no clear direction to follow. Personally I think any technological change that results in a re-named or re-release model should be a separate listing as opposed to a variation. Since I don't use the hardware listing for my own uses anyway I'm fine with whatever guidelines are set down. Also since I don't make policy or make the guidelines all I want to know is which ones to follow.

You should check out the Videopac section. Some of those systems are purely re-badged G7000's with as minimal differences as stickers/labels but adding them as variations looks horrible and confusing in the search lists as opposed to their real names. Of course adding them as variations with their proper names is impossible with the script right now unless as an original or re-edited later which makes unnecessary work.

My original question is when dealing with an true variation whether they should be renamed or not after they've been added since variations have the original listings name locked in. Are we going with Philips Videopac G7000 [Schneider Videopac 741+] or Schneider Videopac 741+ which is what they'd be called at retail or on the machine/packaging. That's the only thing holding back those edits in the review list right now. The script doesn't allow the latter without re-edits after approval and that's why I had asked.

I would think that it should be the retail name. Variations were intended to be things like color, where the title would be the same title as the parent title.

Anyways, here is a call for whoever is willing... if you want to write the hardware guidelines then please volunteer. I wrote the general guidelines, and I really wanted the editors to write their section specific guidelines as was discussed in the past. Unfortunately, people are busy and that may not be possible. So, if you are willing to write the hardware guidelines please speak up. First dibs will go to Andy, but if he is not able to do them then I would appreciate it if someone else did. This has gone too long without guidelines, and I'll tell you this point blank- nothing will be upgraded until the guidelines are written. That would be a pity, since there is a slight chance things could get done in 2 or three weeks. But, there is no rush to launch, and with the new clean site, I'd like to have clear cut guidelines. Makes sense? I hope so.

Well to break it down very simply as to maybe eliminate some confusion

New hardware entry:
Original system
Change in hardware (as noted with all the atari and sega systems)
Bundle: hardware(controllers) software(games and/or demos)

Variation:
Different color
Different UPC on system box

How do those basic guidelines sound?

As for the Genny stuff that one is totally my bad and i will take the blame for it.
Genesis 2 and Genesis 3 should also definately not be a variant of any of the previous models of Genesis. Model 3 wasn't even made by Sega it was done by Majesco and was different in every way.

I stopped adding hardware because it wasn't really resolved and everything was still pretty uncertain... and still is.

OK this isn't a full guidelines list and would appreciate it if some one could type this into English.

I feel Keith is pretty much right on all accounts, every issue he has raised I pretty much agree with. Variants should only be used if it is a cosmetic difference for example colour or design. Model upgrates/ updates or related hardware should have their own seperate entry. On the issue of (for example) the many different PlayStation releases with slightly different bios, these should be covered in the relevant section to each entry. We do not need thirty different entries for a PlayStation as the regular punter wouldn't have a fucking clue what was going on.

I also propose that before any more items get added to the database the ones which are in need sorting out. I am guilty of giving things variants of others when they are not as I  am sure others are. There are also some entries in their which I don't agree with at all.

http://www.rfgeneration.com/PHP/gethwinfo.php?ID=U-064-H-00010-D& is a revised Nintendo 64 release, therefore two N64 charcoal entries are in the database.

http://www.rfgeneration.com/PHP/gethwinfo.php?ID=E-114-H-00010-G& is a entry for a Amstrad GX4000, it's in as a variant of a Amstard 464. It should have its own entry and it's actual own listing within the full database as it is totally different from ahome computer, as its a console.

http://www.rfgeneration.com/PHP/gethwinfo.php?ID=U-061-H-00100-A& is a entry for "Mouse" on PlayStation, not particulary descriptive if you ask me. Hence the reason the entries I have done have included whose mouse it would have been ie "Sony PlayStation Mouse". I know this may not be what it states on the box but a lot of the hardware entries are very much up for interpretation.

I know I haven't been around much lately to sort this out but hopefully I will try and get more done in the future. Like I have already said we need to sort out all of the entries already in there first though, as I think we all can appreciate aren't entered correctly. 

I added somewhere in the vicinity of 150-200 systems or so a couple of weeks ago going through the Archive Search in alphabetical order. Starting with 3DO I worked my way down to Mattel Intellivision on the list. That includes PAL and NTSC-J systems as well. Not all of them need to be changed mind you but there are whole sections. Here's the sections from #'s down to M's that need to be changed:

Amstrad CPC
Atari 2600
Atari 5200
Atari 7800
Atari XEGS
Bally Professional Arcade
Fairchild Channel F
Magnavox Odyssey^2/Videopac
Mattel Intellivision

The other 52 of 61 systems on that list between 3DO and Mattel Intellivision were entered as separate entries not variations when applicable so they should be fine.  8)

Dave, what's the feasability of altering some of the entries which are in as variants to having their own seperate ID?

Also could every one else give their two bobs worth to this whole subject it has obviously been pending for a while, and has started to reach a boiling point.

I am ok with everything as stated, as long as it's consistent.

Another issue I think we need to address is what gets added.  I personally don't think we should add all of the items that come in a retail box as separate db entries, if it was available separately ok.  As an example under 32x there are listings for the plates and connecting cables, if those we not available by themselves (I don't have a clue if they were or not) then I don't think they should be entries.  Things like P/S or AV adaptors that you could purchase replacements packaged by themselves (original and 3rd party) would be ok.  To me that would be like adding a game that came on 5 CDs as 5 entries.

OK, I used Anthony's list of requirements and put them into an "adding new entries" section of the guidelines.  Whoever is writing the guidelines can use this as a starting point and flesh out the rest.


Adding New Entries

If a console or other piece of hardware does not exist in the database, it can be added through the "Add Hardware Entries" script.  Members may also suggest additions of hardware through the member submission script.  New hardware entries can be one of two classes: separate entry or variant. In order to determine which class a new entry is to be placed in, use the following checklist:
 
A hardware item deserves a separate entry if ANY of these conditions are met:

•   It is an original system

        OR

•   The internal specifications of the hardware has changed

        OR

•   It is part of a bundle that is not in the database

A hardware item deserves to be a variation if it DID NOT meet ANY of the requirements above and it fulfills ANY of the requirements below:

•   It has a different color

        OR

•   The UPC on system box is different

All other aspects of the entry must be identical to the main entry in order for it to be considered a variation, including the name.

If a new entry does not meet any of the above requirements for a variation or separate entry or you are not sure after reading these guidelines, post in the staff forum to resolve the issue. If necessary, these guidelines will be updated to reflect any new requirements decided upon.

Hello all.

I like Storm's starting point for these guidelines.  However, I do think we need to add the following entries for the "Class" field when adding a new hardware piece:

o Consoles (this would replace 'Systems')
o Handhelds
o Arcade Machines
o Pongs
o Hybrid's

My thought is that if we start to gather all of this information without correctly identifying the 'Class', then the DB entry for 'Systems' will become extremely muddled with a little bit of everything.  Adding these new 'class' types to the available selections allows us the ability to easily offer sorting a collection by system type.  Not doing so now (establishing) the systems types) will cause a great deal of work down the road if planned/proposed expansions (Arcade Machines, etc.).

How The Class Should Be Determined For New Hardware Entries

Pongs
o Any system based on the AY-3-8500 chip, and variations of it.
o Games are built in the system and do not require catridges
o Requires a TV for display/gameplay

Arcade Machines
o Pretty Obvious

Handhelds
o Able to play immediately right out of the box
o Primary attribute is to be played anywhere and is portable
o Has an internal display screen/device

Consoles
o Plays catridges/media immediately upon starting without system set-up
o Primary purpose should be gameplay and have a significant library of cartridges/media to support this
o Used as a stationary device and require a TV to display/play (exceptions - Vectrex and Adventure Vision)

Hybrids (Primarily PC Hybrids like the C64, various MSX models, et al.)
o Requires booting an OS prior to playing a games
o Requires external add-ons to play games (i.e. C64 requires the drive)
o Exception - possibly DHS (DIScover technology) for the few Alien MM Stations

Let me know your thoughts, as well as if creating these new class segments is possible.

Thanks.

Terry

Hybrids? I'm sorry but what is a hybrid and how is a C64 meant to be a pc hybrid?
Surely they are just computers, pure and simple.

Arcades is going to be it's own separate db; it has too many differences from games and hardware to be in the same database. I guess it may be wise to delineate hardware from Arcades.

Don't forget to consider things like cords, controllers, and things that are not consoles or handhelds.

It can be done, but it is not very easy and I would rather not be transitioning thousands.

Belgarath - yes - you are right.  This is a standard PC entry, but would differ from say a TI 99/4a, which is a hybrid of sorts since it accepts cartridges much like a console.  Hybrid is probably not warrented.

OK – we have the June 8th deadline looming.  Here are my thoughts for our hardware guidelines
_____________________________________________________________

Hardware Guidelines

New Hardware Entries (must fulfill all requirements)
O Original Gaming System
O Unique cartridge/media and gaming programming language

New Hardware Variations (any of the following)
O Color variations
O Technical updates
O Regional releases
O Clones
O Systems with the ability to play media from multiple Original Game Systems that have been released by the same manufacturer/developer.

Use of ‘Multiple Consoles'
O Be able to play games from different systems and manufacturers

Accessories
O Be able to be purchased (currently or in the past) on their own and have a unique UPC code
O Bundled items that can not be purchased separately will not be included
O Must attach and interact with a gaming system

NOTES
O Systems with the ability to play media from multiple Original Game Systems should be listed as a variation of the latest Original Game System that said system can technically run.  Example: The JVC X'Eye should be listed as a variation of the Sega CD; The NEC Turbo Duo/Duo/Duo-R/etc. should be listed as a variation of the NEC PC Engine CD.  The Dina 2-in1 should be listed as a ‘Multiple Consoles' since it can play both Colecovision and Sega SG-1000 games.
_____________________________________________________________

I have read through this thread and have considered the arguments for adding a new entry.  A good example was the Sega Genesis that was discussed. 

The various releases of this system should all be listed as variations under the general Sega Genesis/Mega Drive hardware entry.  Each model has various technical and housing updates, but they accept and play only one type of media – the Sega Genesis cartridges.  Hence, they should all be listed together under one section.

Another good example is the Emerson Arcadia 2001.  The technology inside it was cloned and released under many different names throughout the world.  However, this is all based on the original technology that was first introduced by the original Arcadia.  The same applies to the Bally Professional Arcade, the Atari 2600, etc. 

The “Multiple Consoles” section should be used as a last resort.  Consoles designed to play games from multiple Original Game Systems are difficult to categorize.  For example, the NEC Turbo Duo combines play for two Original Game Systems but it currently has its own section, but does not fulfill the criteria stated above, hence it should be a variation of the NEC PC Engine CD

From looking at the individual items listed, we have a number of systems that should be listed as variations, or reclassed to the appropriate console.

Your thoughts are welcomed.

My Comments are in italics

Hardware Guidelines

New Hardware Entries (must fulfill all requirements)
O Original Gaming System
O Unique cartridge/media and gaming programming language
Manufacturer?

New Hardware Variations (any of the following)
O Color variations
O Technical updates
O Regional releases
O Clones
O Systems with the ability to play media from multiple Original Game Systems that have been released by the same manufacturer/developer.

Use of ‘Multiple Consoles'
O Be able to play games from different systems and manufacturers

Accessories
O Be able to be purchased (currently or in the past) on their own and have a unique UPC code
O Bundled items that can not be purchased separately will not be included <--What about the magic of ebay? Technically anything in this day and age can be bought separately
O Must attach and interact with a gaming system <--There is branded cases and stuff in the database, should that be removed? Personally, cases and crap should probably go under gaming memorabilia, a different database.

NOTES
O Systems with the ability to play media from multiple Original Game Systems should be listed as a variation of the latest Original Game System that said system can technically run.  Example: The JVC X'Eye should be listed as a variation of the Sega CD; The NEC Turbo Duo/Duo/Duo-R/etc. should be listed as a variation of the NEC PC Engine CD.  The Dina 2-in1 should be listed as a ‘Multiple Consoles' since it can play both Colecovision and Sega SG-1000 games. <-- Shouldn't Manufacturer be considered in the addition of new hardware? I believe it was in the past.
_____________________________________________________________

I have read through this thread and have considered the arguments for adding a new entry.  A good example was the Sega Genesis that was discussed. 

The various releases of this system should all be listed as variations under the general Sega Genesis/Mega Drive hardware entry.  Each model has various technical and housing updates, but they accept and play only one type of media – the Sega Genesis cartridges.  Hence, they should all be listed together under one section.

Another good example is the Emerson Arcadia 2001.  The technology inside it was cloned and released under many different names throughout the world.  However, this is all based on the original technology that was first introduced by the original Arcadia.  The same applies to the Bally Professional Arcade, the Atari 2600, etc. 

The “Multiple Consoles” section should be used as a last resort.  Consoles designed to play games from multiple Original Game Systems are difficult to categorize.  For example, the NEC Turbo Duo combines play for two Original Game Systems but it currently has its own section, but does not fulfill the criteria stated above, hence it should be a variation of the NEC PC Engine CD

Is it okay to move this to The Thinktank, so more people than just staff can comment on this, I am sure we are not the only ones with interest in this issue.

Thanks for the feedback Trader.  My responses to your notes are italicized.

Manufacturer? --> Not needed since it has to be an Original Game System

What about the magic of ebay? Technically anything in this day and age can be bought separately --> This is true, but we can not be all-inclusive for every item.  In my opinion, it has to be/was able to be purchased separately.  If we do not limit this, then we have no way of verifying information submitted from users.

There is branded cases and stuff in the database, should that be removed? Personally, cases and crap should probably go under gaming memorabilia, a different database. --> Yes - they should be removed or relocated as you described.

Shouldn't Manufacturer be considered in the addition of new hardware? I believe it was in the past. --> No.  See my example on the Sega Genesis.  They all play the same games/media format.  Also, the Genesis 3 by Majesco does the same thing - all should be listed under the Sega Genesis / Mega Drive area.

Is it OK to move this to The Thinktank, so more people than just staff can comment on this, I am sure we are not the only ones with interest in this issue. --> I agree to gather other's opinions on this very important issue.  Should we wait a bit to refine what we have based upon yours and other staff members opinions before we do that?  Let me know.
Thanks!

Just to be sure everyone is clear, we aren't talking about added a console listing type for each system that gets entered as an original, it's just a matter of getting it's own unique db id number ending in "A".  Either way all system that play Genesis games for example,  will be listed under Sega Genesis / Mega Drive.

What about unique modules? a Master Converter plays SMS games on the GameGear or Genesis, should it be with it's proprietary software library or with it's hardware? Same goes with the IBM PC add-on that plays turbografx cd games or the Pioneer Laseractive "PAC" modules that can play Genesis or TG16 games or the Amstrad Mega PC hybrid.

Welcome back Tan - good to see you again!

Regarding the unique models, the items you listed are more of an accessory to an already established system that do not have any software specifically designed for use for said unit.  A difference might be the Sega 32X - it is an add-on, but had unique, software specifically designed and available for use on it.  The other adaptor-type add-ons should be listed as hardware, using the base unit it attaches to as it's 'parent'. 

Let me know if I hit on what you were thinking.

What I was asking is does everyone think an accessory like say a Genesis Master Converter be listed under the Genesis section or under the Master system Section. It could be argued both ways because a Master Converter has no bearing on any Genesis games and Yet it won't work without one.

The question boils down to listed under parent or listed under the software it utilizes. Which I think applies to the TurboGrafx System Cards as well.

I would think that the item would be listed under the parent system that it attaches to - not the software it utilizes - since it requires said system to run software from a previous system (hence an add-on for the Genesis, not listed in the SMS section).

I agree. But I had to ask anyway because these guidelines need the approval of the concensus so they can be enforced by the staff if a member submits one otherwise and all bases need to be covered so there aren't any loopholes.  :)

Okay, it's time to send this discussion to the general public.

General Members:

We've been having guideline discussions for quite some time now. As our database and site grows it becomes more and more important that we craft guidelines so that our site looks uniform and professional. The last 46 posts are the staff's thoughts on hardware guidelines; now, I am looking for the general members to get their 2 cents in. You have two weeks from the time I make this post to get your two cents in. After that, I'll craft the guidelines from all comments and then submit them to the staff / Andy for approval. I'd like this discussion to climax at a consensus, so please keep the discussion forward thinking.

I thank you all for comments on this matter, and hopefully we can craft guidelines that are concrete as soon as possible.