| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 652 |
Release id #244483 : Oceanborn
TheRyk mentions here that this pic being animated makes it a one file demo. Is that definitely the case for all GFX? I’ve seen many animations on CSDb that were tagged as gfx but which included simple animations.
What’s the definition for whether a graphic is “animated”? |
|
... 21 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 652 |
My 2c here: it's not fair on Worrior1 at all to recategorise this release. He put it out as "C64 graphics" because that's what he made. Animated graphics are still graphics - and there are many examples of this on CSDb.
Music: it's ripped. Zero effort here.
Code: isn't it just linked together with PNG2PRG or something..? Hence no coder listed (whether Burglar should be credited I don't know - he might not want to be credited on 1000s of GFX releases on CSDb).
There's a small window of time on CSDb where people can catch voters. Votes on this release should of course be for the graphics, not the music nor "code". Categorising it as a "One File Demo" so that it goes up against such as AWE, Layers, Cubic Dream, Party Elk 2, Copper Booze etc is definitely not right. |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4714 |
Look at today’s music entries: full blown demo parts, many of them. Still: they were meant to show off the music, therefore: Music entry. Same goes for logos released with music and a scroller: the purpose was to show off a logo, therefore: gfx entry.
This should be changed back to gfx entry imho. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11327 |
Graphics screen with music playing was called "demo" ever since the first one appeared on compunet.
But yes, a clear definition for this (and many other things) is still needed. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 206 |
Complicated.
The entry that started this conversation got user rated as Graphic I’d say, no matter the category. For now at least. I don’t think users actually feel this (beautiful thing) is a 9.4 One-File Demo. Perhaps it’s best to leave the categorization to authors when it comes to prods released out of compos. They know the contexts in which their prods got made. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11327 |
What an author thinks it is and how something is classified in the db really are two different things. For the db to make any sense, the same rules must be applied to each entry. |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4714 |
It makes little sense to recategorize all, say, Finnish Gold music entries in every compo as one-file-demos either. Makes it hell to search for specific music entries and sort stuff. |
| |
4gentE
Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 206 |
Quote:What an author thinks it is and how something is classified in the db really are two different things. For the db to make any sense, the same rules must be applied to each entry.
I understand the concept of classification. But I can’t help but feel this cleanup would severely curtail some authors. Something like: “Dear Flotsam. Unfortunately you can’t keep producing your awesome graphic design to go with your music. Let alone animations. If you continue, every future music entry from you that contains other elements than music will be classified as a demo.” Or this: “Dear Sarge. Unfortunately you can’t keep asking your musician friends to compose awesome music to go along with your gfx/anims.” Do we really want that? Perhaps a compromise could be classifying prods dependent on whether a coder was involved. As in, if a coder (and custom code) was involved then it’s a demo. If readymade displayers/SID players were used, it’s whatever author says it is. Not that this would actually clean anything up, but it resembles a “rule”… |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11327 |
If whatever classification on csdb affects what you "can do" then you are doing it wrong in the first place.
And yes, certain rules may not make sense. However as long as no rules exist things make even less sense. (And adding credits to rob hubbard to all and everything that uses hubbard tunes will never make sense for that matter). |
| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 652 |
GPZ: in the absence of “rules”, there’s still common sense. The scene doesn’t need rules for something as simple as deciding whether a release is made to show off effects, graphics or music.
What next? Reclassify cracks as demos because they feature an intro on the front? It’s not just a game any more, after all, and often the intro is more interesting than the game itself?
Or, as I say, we simply use common sense. |
| |
Jetboy
Registered: Jul 2006
Posts: 278 |
Quoting RaistlinGPZ: in the absence of “rules”, there’s still common sense.
There is no common sense, everyone has one's own.
Some have more than one, especially here on CSDB. |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 - Next |
