| |
Didi
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 479 |
Release id #147008 : Ring on a String +
Quoting User Comment
Submitted by hedning on 4 April 2016
Didi: Problem with your argument with Monster Buster is that Onslaught won that race with this equally untrained release (they were first on the majority of boards): Monster Buster - then they uploaded a new trained version later on.
Well, from my memory the trained version of Monster Buster was uploaded to the boards as well to prevent anyone to grab the points through the quality rule (a fact which is not documented by any post), and secure the firstie.
With the argument of being uploaded to the majority of boards you could have got any of our this years RGCD releases, because The Hidden was offline that night. Just wait until it is back and upload to all 3 and get away with it. That's why it is not the way I handle it. Majority is being first on 2 of 3 within 24h. And who was first can be seen in the directory listing on the board.
Well, for me it's the quality rule which fits this release and justifies giving the points to Excess here. Different mag editors have always had different ways to handle releases. |
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11114 |
loldrama |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4595 |
<Post edited by hedning on 4/4-2016 21:27>
All releases were released to the boards, in that you are right, but only because they are not released otherwise, and you can easily check out VN and The List online, and Jazzcat awarded ONS the first release due to the 24h rule, and he links the untrained version. That is a fact. The trained version is irrelevant for the status as first release. Laxity got points for the NTSC fixing of the game, and has nothing to do with the trainers.
I would say Jazzcat (and you) would be inconsistent if you accept the outcome of that case, but not the recent situation between Triad and Excess.
That said, I would never argue if the game had obvious need of training. This dicussion is active due to that this situation is (gladly) rare.
When it comes to the boards it's first on three boards within 24h, and The Hidden was back half of this time - just as many hours Colosseum was online (it was offline during the early morning to April 1nd (shut down by the sysop according to a user who was online trying to upload a release)) and Triad had no problem being first on all three boards within 24 hours, something Excess had problems with. Their release was uploaded to The Hidden ~26 hours after Triad's release, and before that time The Hidden had been back since ~12 hours.
It's a quite easy case for me. You can say whatever you want about Triad's release, but there is no real need of a trainer, and the case reminds me a lot like the Monster Buster case 3 years ago, where an untrained release of that game was ranked as the first release. + the fact that Triad had their release on all boards within 24 hours. Excess uploaded their version after that time span.
This discussion is not personal. It's just a need to discuss the rules so that we don't fall into three different first releases in three mags. First is first. It's really that simple. Lame releases can be put aside if they are not seriously meant, but if you really release lame releases you have to live with the consequence. |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4595 |
Oh, and smartass comments from people that really don't care about this issue is not needed. You can rant on IRC. OKthxbye. |
| |
Didi
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 479 |
Refering to my information Stormfront had no possiblity to stay within the 24h when he got the release from Nimbus, as all 3 boards were unreachable for hours at the time he tried to upload it, so he told me. (All 3 boards seem to be quite unstable at the moment.) So he just posted it here, which was way within the 24h. No reason for re-release points for sure because it was a technical issue. The Hidden just came back as first after the 24h timeframe was already up.
Excess gave a reason for claiming the Triad release being invalid. For me this reason is OK the way I interpret the rules. IMO the trainer rule was made to uphold a minimum quality level. And in this spirit I accept the reason from Excess. There have always been different interpretations about the sense of trainers but they were installed anyway. If in doubt, just add a trainer and you are on the safe side.
Regarding being first on all 3 boards: You can only upload on reachable boards. There have been a lot of times where only 1 or 2 of the boards were available. Your interpretation opens the possibility to upload on all 3 way after the 24h, even if only 1 was availbale for 24h. In this case the single upload there will count, even if someone else uploads on all 3 more than a day later. ACK? |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4595 |
Didi: No. All boards were up at different times within the 24h time frame, which is the time frame I refer to. I am not opening up to anything else. Single upload will only count if only 1 board was available in the 24h time frame.
Antidote was available all the time, and as you can see in The Hidden logs Triad uploaded their version early april 1st if I remember correct. I was also online during the day and evening. You uploaded your stuff before the 24h time was up, right?
If only two boards are online when you upload you have to check the third all day, until 24h have passed, after that you are safe. Thug life. |
| |
taper
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 119 |
Again, Didi is not reading what other people say but interpreting things his own way.
Hedning described it perfectly fine the first time around [about the boards], and still he had to clarify himself since you simply do not listen.
Again, hilarious that you used Monster Buster as an example to back up your interpretation of the rule - that one backfired quite nicely, don't you think?
I just interpret the given rules the way they are written and I was not the one who created them. But I accept that there are different opinions here which do not come together in this case.
You are not interpreting the rules the way they were written, you are interpreting them to your own liking. Unlike you, I was involved when that rule was created - so perhaps you should listen more closely to what I'm saying.
If in doubt, just add a trainer and you are on the safe side.
No, Didi. As I said before, we will not add trainers just for the sake of getting points in Game Corner. We add trainers when we think there is a point in adding them. Just as the rule you keep referring to actually states...
It's not my headache if you put the credability of Game Corner on the line, but you can forget us adapting to your skewed view of the rules. |
| |
sailor
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 90 |
"If in doubt, just add a trainer and you are on the safe side."
No. In my opinion a trainer should have a valid reason and usage. You don't slam a trainer just because. What we gonna see next, a trained Winter Games ? :) |
| |
Mason
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 459 |
Problem is the 2003 rules is too complex and complicated. Especially it's hard to judge when a release is better than another and if a trainer is useable or not.
The old system was more logical as first release was a first release except it was broken/bad cracked or the first released was a pre-release/beta-release
If you want to differ between the quality releases and first releases it needs 2 charts. One chart where you get points for the first release and one where everyone can compete to do the best quality release |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4595 |
Quote: Problem is the 2003 rules is too complex and complicated. Especially it's hard to judge when a release is better than another and if a trainer is useable or not.
The old system was more logical as first release was a first release except it was broken/bad cracked or the first released was a pre-release/beta-release
If you want to differ between the quality releases and first releases it needs 2 charts. One chart where you get points for the first release and one where everyone can compete to do the best quality release
We had that approach in Propaganda, and will have again. |
| |
Didi
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 479 |
I checkted the upload dates on The Hidden (which is currently the only accesible source, because Colosseum is down and Antidote is reorganizing drive #1). Excess release was in fact uploaded more than 24h after the Triad one. Therefore 24h rule has no grip.
But they thought to have a good reason for a proper release regarding the rules, which is not bound to the 24h rule. From my point of view this reason is valid the way the rules are currently written.
On the other hand Mason has a good point here, because first releasing has never been about putting out good quality but just about being first at any cost.
The trainer rule was invented at a time where groups were releasing junk just for the fame in a shitty way. Maybe we can agree that we are mature enough that we do not need this rule anymore and drop it for the future.
In this case this release would be the proof piece that the rule is was based on is bad and just causes trouble because it is always a personal point of view if a trainer is needed or not. Therefor the trainer rule should be dropped... and the proof piece has to be ignored for the release list. |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4595 |
We all know shit when we see it - I think all editors of the mags can agree on that. If some idiots start to try to piss on the lists and so on, we can just agree ignoring them, like we already do with fake group stuff. |
| |
Didi
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 479 |
So the conclusion would be:
- Triad stays with the points for this game.
- Excess does not get re-release points.
- Trainer(s) are no longer required for future first releases, but everyone will try to put them out in a proper way.
Just waiting for Jazzcat to agree with this. ;) |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 243 |
plus: shitmen will not be blacklisted ;) |
| |
Didi
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 479 |
Shitmen was invented to be blacklisted. ;)
Release under Hitmen and you are welcome to join the fun and show us how it's done. :D |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4595 |
Quote: So the conclusion would be:
- Triad stays with the points for this game.
- Excess does not get re-release points.
- Trainer(s) are no longer required for future first releases, but everyone will try to put them out in a proper way.
Just waiting for Jazzcat to agree with this. ;)
Indeed. Excess did put out their release in time, but did not win the race, thus Triad will get the points in Propaganda, Excess will be mentioned of course, and will not recieve re-release penalty.
For me (and obviously Jazzcat if we check the history of his former judgements, and now Didi) trainers were never an issue when it comes to first releases that does not need training. People that try to snatch easy points on games that need at least some training will be laughed at from time to time, of course. We have the power to write what we want in the mags, and I believe all active groups aim for quality even if it can be some ugly point hunting from time to time (Paper Plane comes to mind etc), but sometimes we just have different approaches, like in Labyrinth &S (solution) and Labyrinth +2M (trainers), where time was running but both groups made some time consuming effort to just don't introslap the release. I would say we are mature enough to handle this (even if demosceners will see this whole discussion as proof that we are immature as hell playing this game in 2016). |
| |
taper
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 119 |
No objections from me. The 2003 rule might very well be past its expiration date.
It would indeed surprise me as well if active groups today starts just introlinking games that do need trainers, levelpacking, onefiling etc. just to gain points. As Hedning said; If some idiots start to try to piss on the lists and so on, we can just agree ignoring them, like we already do with fake group stuff.
Sounds like a plan. Glad something constructive came out of this occasionally heated discussion. |
| |
Smasher
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 512 |
glad u guys found an agreement. :)
what I don't like, but it's just my humble ignorant ignorable opinion, is that c64 1st release rules come straight from the pc 0day world.
dunno if you adopted them to put some order, or whatever was the reason... in the old glory cracking days there was no need for that: first not crashing version on the oversea boards and you won. ok, everything changes and evolves, so I guess whether I like that or not I should respect those rules too.
I think the first time I saw some written draft rules was with Gamers Guide or? perhaps the Triad dudez can help my memory. |
| |
taper
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 119 |
ZeSmasher: Gamers Guide was not focused on firstreleases at all, it had a whole other approach. Something similar would be hard to implement today, as there presently is no "mailscene" to talk about.
I guess Shock or perhaps Mamba was first when it comes to firstrelease rules. |
| |
Smasher
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 512 |
yes, GG was comparing size and trainers - true! damn exomizer for killing all the fun, lol!
I don't remember such rules in Mamba, at least not in the [C] years. charts were based on votesheets. |
| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 616 |
GG was also awarding "best" release to ones that had a bunch of stuff ripped out of them. But that's another argument.
On the serious side, if this *must* be taken seriously these days.
My opinion here is that more than just linking an intro to something should be considered a release at all. Not necessarily a trainer either, but put some effort into the release ffs. Any knob can download a PD release, intro link and upload to a board.
I have this opinion because with 99% of stuff these days there is *no cracking involved*. It should require more effort than this really. I understand the race completely, perhaps the rules should once again be revised for the modern times, even if only a handful of people care about it anymore. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11114 |
Quote:Release under Hitmen and you are welcome to join
so the name of the group is now relevant?
you guys are so cute <3 |
| |
Shine
Registered: Jul 2012
Posts: 327 |
Quote: Quote:Release under Hitmen and you are welcome to join
so the name of the group is now relevant?
you guys are so cute <3
I think he means the "intention" of a group ... which is not less cute somehow! :D |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11114 |
the intention is to have fun, obviously. and "banning" a group because of its name is just as silly as ignoring a release because you dont like the spelling of someones handle. |
| |
Shine
Registered: Jul 2012
Posts: 327 |
full ack! |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4595 |
If the group in question, be it Shitmen, Dinosaurs or whatnot, tries to ruin the tradition and just make fun of the cracking scene, or mock it, we can of course see it as fake shit. Having fun can be more than just making fun of something. I am fully aware that most people think the cracking scene on C64 of today is completely meaningless, thus a nice victim to mock or make fun of. When it comes to fake groups it's a combination - play retarded which can be quite fun, but also trying to ruin stuff for the few people that tries to uphold some kind of serious cracking scene. It's quite easy to identify. And has nothing to do with the name of a group. If Really Proud Lamers or Bad Taste do release a serious release it will be counted (but that is of course against their principles ad purpose, I guess). |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11114 |
lol@serious release |
| |
Shine
Registered: Jul 2012
Posts: 327 |
@ hedning:
I respect your clarification at all. Maybe i am not as long in this scene to have the right to "judge" about cracking, but for me at least it's always fun to have a spectrum of different views and opinions.
Almost every discipline is an art for itself.
We are all different and we have all different "fun-factors".
I think it's hard to decide what is individual fun. |
| |
Fix
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 54 |
Then everyone agrees that an "untouched" original with just an intro can have the first points?
My 5 cents would be that it should be a "proper" crack, what that now would be... Should be qualified for first release points.
Maybe a good time now is to find a good solution that active groups can agree upon? |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11114 |
i like how simply releasing better releases than those evil "fake" groups (and making them irrelevant for the charts that way) is not an option :) if those "fake" releases ruin it for you it means only one thing: your releases suck. |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 243 |
If fake-groups are faster than you, dont search the problem at the fake-groups, but try to improve your "cracking-skill" and be fucking faster. ;) |
| |
Shine
Registered: Jul 2012
Posts: 327 |
The problem is, that some people think, that "serious" cracking need to be labeled by "serious" groups. I have to disagree in this case. |
| |
sailor
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 90 |
Quoting FungusGG was also awarding "best" release to ones that had a bunch of stuff ripped out of them.
hmmmno? :)
If you actually left something out you got a negative comment. The ones with intro vs without were two separate categories of the same game. |
| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 616 |
Not to mention that a lot of the things being released now were released by those "lamer labels" in the past, because of the type of material it was. It really didn't have anything to do with mocking or making fun of first release groups usually, but it certainly was used that way a few times when those groups released full price games out of spite.
If the groups which remain active are going to feel insulted by that, I think maybe you should take a more open look at the history. That is why some people tend not to take it very seriously. I don't think you can blame them (us) for it either.
This is exactly the type of reason that groups like Cyberpunx, Nostalgia, Remember, Lurid+Tricycle etc started to do older games using modern techniques. Sometimes that type of competition could be fun too and not revolve around 1sties and points... seems only Hokuto Force tries to compete on these terms, which is an admirable goal too. However apples and oranges again.
Maybe everyone should just chill out and not take things so serious anymore, and just have fun and a good time like you all seem to profess you want to. With competition there will be drama and differences of opinion always no matter the scene, so make a choice. |
| |
Shine
Registered: Jul 2012
Posts: 327 |
"Maybe everyone should just chill out and not take things so serious anymore, and just have fun and a good time like you all seem to profess you want to."
This should be the most important rule! |
| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 616 |
Quote: Not to mention that a lot of the things being released now were released by those "lamer labels" in the past, because of the type of material it was. It really didn't have anything to do with mocking or making fun of first release groups usually, but it certainly was used that way a few times when those groups released full price games out of spite.
If the groups which remain active are going to feel insulted by that, I think maybe you should take a more open look at the history. That is why some people tend not to take it very seriously. I don't think you can blame them (us) for it either.
This is exactly the type of reason that groups like Cyberpunx, Nostalgia, Remember, Lurid+Tricycle etc started to do older games using modern techniques. Sometimes that type of competition could be fun too and not revolve around 1sties and points... seems only Hokuto Force tries to compete on these terms, which is an admirable goal too. However apples and oranges again.
Maybe everyone should just chill out and not take things so serious anymore, and just have fun and a good time like you all seem to profess you want to. With competition there will be drama and differences of opinion always no matter the scene, so make a choice.
Hmm I remember checking the lists and noticed that load pics and game intros were removed from some releases. Maybe I misunderstood that there were more than one category or how the rankings were done. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11114 |
the one big problem with GG was that it encouraged making the smallest version - which indeed often resulted in a bunch of ripped to death versions competing. thank god this nonsense is over :) |
| |
Smasher
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 512 |
"the shorter the better" - yes, real life is completely different :) |
| |
Didi
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 479 |
It's not only the size that matters. :D |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4595 |
Now when I've had my snus and coffee: The discussion above is only important when there are 10+ releases at the same time, and everyone is rushing for firsties (with the exception of this year where there was no real rush). All other years when it was RGCD time practically all active groups made some effort to at least put in a trainer or two before releasing their version, so it's not a problem really. And then after some days someone (often Didi) will put out a ntsc fixed mail release. So: I am not worried. This whole discussion is about if it's necessary or not with trainers in Ring on a String.
When it comes to the state of the first release scene of today, people tend to say that we release stuff today that was impossible to release back in the days. Yes, of course. It's not 1989 anymore with floods of commercial products, and the first release scene takes some pride in researching and preserving unknown games of the past (of course we won't release whatever we find though) - some of these games were unthinkable to release 1992, of course. For example the extremely simple but completely unknown commercial cartridge game Megapede +DG, but then we make a good package out of it before release. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11114 |
Quote:we won't release whatever we find
good one! |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4595 |
Quote: Quote:we won't release whatever we find
good one!
Thanx. |
| |
Cresh
Registered: Jan 2004
Posts: 354 |
Quote: Thanx.
GP crackers will handle that! :P |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4595 |
Quote: GP crackers will handle that! :P
Why do you spend time here, Cresh? Don't you have a demo or something to make? Be creative. Try it. It's probably good for you. |
| |
taper
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 119 |
This turned into an interesting topic!
As for Gamers Guide, it was indeed noted when the game-intro was ripped away from a release, to make sure apples were compare with apples and pears with pears. However, eventhough it was not in any way intentional, it is correct that it might have triggered the use of short crack intros in some cases.
My own personal view is; small release - small crackintro, large release - larger crackintro. We have a few amazingly short intros in store from Tao that have been used at times, one is shorter than 128 bytes if I recall correctly. Great to use on really tiny things.
As for fakelabels, for me they are past their expiration date by at least ten years. The joke is old and just tedious. For me it's simple; Either we think a game is good enough to spend time on and release, or we don't bother.
About the quality of games, I think it's unfair to say that many things released 'for real' today would be released by lamer labels in the past. Sure, you can always find individual examples to prove that point, but in general I think it's wrong.
Games like Gravitrix, Hessian, Heroes & Cowards, Bruce Lee II, Darkness and so on would have been sold as full price titles in the past. A whole range of new games would without problem qualify for release on budget-tapes from Kixx, Codemasters or Alternative Software. Most of the rest would qualify for magazine cover tapes or commercial diskmags such as Magic Disk/Golden Disk.
There are a lot of great new C64 games that deserve to be played!
Also, we tend to view the past through very rosy glasses and forget that there were plenty of bad games back in the days. I mean, who thought games like Olli and Lissa 3, Hard Drivin or Peter Beardsley's International Football (just to mention a very few) were great games? Not me at least - but they were still deemed interesting enough in some way to justify releases from real cracking groups.
I sadly think that much criticism towards the newer games come from people who simply do not play on older platforms anymore. They have rosy memories of old games, but couldn't be bothered to play them again, and would certainly not bother to play anything new. And that is fine, if all you want to do is to play your PS4 - go ahead! But perhaps then they shouldn't really comment on new games for platforms they no longer care about.
One last note on a phenomena I have a hard time to understand. Why do people only interested in demos waste time commenting on the cracking scene?
I'm a member of a forum for people who collect pinball machines and arcade games. Many of the members are only interested in one of the above and not both. But I've never see the arcade people jump into the pinball collectors thread to mock them, or the other way around. When the pinball people argue about if Addams Family or Black Knight is the best pinball game ever, do the arcade guys turn up and laughingly explain that all pinball games suck? Nope... they simply mind their own business, and avoid wasting their own precious spare time on things that do not interest or concern them...
That seem quite clever to me, at least.
One especially hilarious thing is when some demo guy starts mocking the cracking scene of today, and it turns out that person haven't contributed to ANYTHING c64 related for the past 15 years. We would all be much happier if you spent your time doing SOMETHING - ANYTHING c64 related than just whine on others who actually are productive, even if you don't get the point of what they are doing.
I considering myself equally committed to the demo and cracking scene. Thus it makes me sad when we just can't empower eachother. "Cracking is not my thing, but if you think it's fun, more power to you!" - and the other way around. |
| |
Smasher
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 512 |
hey, Hard Drivin' had some cool 3D... I liked that one! :)
agree about fake labels. they made some sense in the past, a bit less these days. |
| |
CSixx
Registered: Jan 2013
Posts: 12 |
Seems logical to me that at least *something* of value should be added before being considered a release at all.
If you do nothing to the game, then you didn't release anything new, nothing that we didn't already have. |
| |
Moloch
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 2894 |
@Smasher - Try playing Hard Drivin today without the nostalgia glasses. Even with SuperCPU the game is a disaster ;) |
| |
Smasher
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 512 |
I've nostalgia glasses built in me, can't remove them :) |
| |
Peacemaker
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 243 |
oh my dear. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11114 |
make better releases. its that simple :) |
| |
Jazzcat
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1044 |
Apologies for a late reply on this thread. I have been on a holiday from the scene and this kind of drama for the past 8 months or so but stumbled, then found the door again.
Regarding the rule, in the years leading up to 2003, there was some releases that were questionable with no trainers. We wanted to influence the cracking culture with an emphasis on increased quality. In context to 2016, I agree that most are adhering to that and thus the rule can be updated.
The below rule has now been updated to the following, maintaining the discretional right of The List author with majority consultation of others to discount a release.
- Trainer(s) are no longer required for future first releases, but everyone will try to put them out in a proper way. |
