Homebrew, Reproduction & Hack Guidelines

[tactical_nuke]

You know, making "Hack" and "Prototype" into release types might be a good option. That way, they're in the database but distinctly separate from legitimate releases. I still don't think straight up pirate carts belong though. The separation would be like:

Totally Original But Unlicensed Games Released After Lifetime of Console >> Homebrew
Modified Existing Games that use IPs, IE. Translations and level hacks >> Hack
Unreleased Games and Builds >> Prototype

[leej07]

You know, making "Hack" and "Prototype" into release types might be a good option. That way, they're in the database but distinctly separate from legitimate releases. I still don't think straight up pirate carts belong though. The separation would be like:

Totally Original But Unlicensed Games Released After Lifetime of Console >> Homebrew
Modified Existing Games that use IPs, IE. Translations and level hacks >> Hack
Unreleased Games and Builds >> Prototype

This. I heartily agree. I feel prototypes are important enough to document. Even if not legitimately released, they do *exist*. Some exist in compilations. As I noted before, Combat 2 is included, but not Thwocker. That doesn't really make sense to me.

[techwizard]

You know, making "Hack" and "Prototype" into release types might be a good option. That way, they're in the database but distinctly separate from legitimate releases. I still don't think straight up pirate carts belong though. The separation would be like:

Totally Original But Unlicensed Games Released After Lifetime of Console >> Homebrew
Modified Existing Games that use IPs, IE. Translations and level hacks >> Hack
Unreleased Games and Builds >> Prototype

This. I heartily agree. I feel prototypes are important enough to document. Even if not legitimately released, they do *exist*. Some exist in compilations. As I noted before, Combat 2 is included, but not Thwocker. That doesn't really make sense to me.

i'm not sure about Combat 2, but i will say that a game existing in a compilation doesn't make other copies of the game eligible for the database, only the compilation itself. as for the hacks as release type, i'm against that because that would open a floodgate of "what is a hack". we might have people submitting modded games as "hacks" and it would be a mess. not to mention that if it's someone re-releasing a game that someone else made, and changing a few lines of code to make it "theirs", that's still illegal because they don't own the rights to the IP.

to me, unreleased, prototypes, and hacks shouldn't be included because they have no defining standards that could be easily tracked. no console would have a definitive "complete list" if they were in the database, as every game has a prototype. unreleased is kind of in the same boat because that could be potentially endless too. hacks are just illegal

if it's a totally original game that was just released without the system maker's permission (unlicensed/homebrew) then that's totally ok because it's not stealing anyone's IP to make the game.

[Izret101]

Apollo added it. When he chimes back in i'm sure he can give reasoning.

[Duke.Togo]

I disagree with having hacks in the DB for the same reason techwizard mentioned. Changing some code is still piracy without permission from the IP holder.

[ApolloBoy]

Why is Combat 2 included on the database?

I think I added that back when our stance on reproduction carts was in limbo, I should probably delete it considering we don't generally allow repro carts anymore.

[supernorst]

Its a shame. There is really nowhere one the web that shows a complete list of games released from Timewalk games. Its already quite difficult to seek out their releases and there is no data on how many games they released and in what quantities. Good luck to anyone like me who wants to find more of their games.

[Slowman]

Its a shame. There is really nowhere one the web that shows a complete list of games released from Timewalk games. Its already quite difficult to seek out their releases and there is no data on how many games they released and in what quantities. Good luck to anyone like me who wants to find more of their games.

Hear, hear.  I understand the arguments others are making against it but I still feel as if they should be tracked for reasons such as these.  I've added a few more repros to my collection since this discussion began and they are still more "real" than anything in anyone's Steam library, which we also track (for some reason).  We're doing a disservice to those who wish to track these games and I view them as no less legitimate than my Maxi-15 or various Tengen carts.  

I do, however, agree strongly with this...

I'll play devils advocate. If I download a ROM, burn it to an EPROM and solder it into a cart, and I only make one copy for myself, it exists. Should I then expect it to be in our database?

I realize this is taking the argument to its extreme, but if we set guidelines they should apply universally IMHO.

Pretty much... where is the line drawn and how fuzzy is that line?  There are other problems too.  Who published it? What year did it come out? UPC #?  Part #?  A few things would have to be overlooked in order for it to work.