Hardware Guidelines and Workplan Discussion

[bum-man]

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.c...um/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.

[TraderJake]

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.

[Tan]

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.

[Tan]

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. 

[AndyC]

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.

[Tan]

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.

[TraderJake]

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.

[Tan]

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?

[St0rmTK421]

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.

[bum-man]

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.

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.

[Tan]

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.

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.

[TraderJake]

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.

[Izret101]

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.

[AndyC]

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.c...p?ID=U-064-H-00010-D& is a revised Nintendo 64 release, therefore two N64 charcoal entries are in the database.

http://www.rfgeneration.c...p?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.c...p?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. 

[Tan]

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.

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.