| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
Credits in user comments
Lately I've been noticing a lot of people entering credits in the user comments, or members in the trivia section of a group. Why not just enter this data the way it's meant to I wonder?
Example: http://noname.c64.org/csdb/release/?id=28712&show=review |
|
... 26 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Style
Registered: Jun 2004
Posts: 498 |
Nintendo made breakfast cereal?
A free cornflake in every box of plastic Marios? |
| |
Jazzcat
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1044 |
They were just examples, not what "should" be. C64 Game Spread sounds lame also, there needs to be reference to a cracking group more so than "game".
|
| |
Style
Registered: Jun 2004
Posts: 498 |
But why mention cracking when the game wasnt cracked?
There are several activities you can do on c64:
* demo making
* game cracking
* swapping/game spreading
etc
Some group did more than 1. I do know why youd want to refer to it as a 'cracking group release' when the group might not solely be a cracking group, and the game wasnt cracked.
C64 Game Distribution, spread...whatever. But dont refer to cracking, it makes no sense. There must be a term suitable for when people release a game that didnt require cracking but they add docs etc and make it more widely available.....
|
| |
Jazzcat
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1044 |
It needs to be referred to a cracking group. I did mention in my earlier post "cracking group", not just "cracking". Best re-read it. :) A cracking group is the group releasing the ware. It's as simple as that.
When I originally joined this database, I created the releases as "C64 games" but then the admin told me to change it to "C64 cracks" to distinguish the release from the game original. So I did this. Then I get in trouble with a bunch of whiners regarding that it's not a "crack" and just a "release".
I guess in the long term, anyone can just download the release and make up their own terminology. But it would be nice to have some flexibility on this database as far as the labelling is concerned. |
| |
iopop
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 317 |
"C64 crack group release" is the most stupid thing I heard in ages. Why not call it what we have been called it for the past 20 years - cracks or in csdb lingo "c64 crack".
its quite interesting that people are screaming about "cracking" non-protected games when it has been in fashion since the later part of the 80ies.. |
| |
Jazzcat
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1044 |
Iopop: I agree, it is stupid, but there needs to be some other definition, at least to stop some ragheads nagging me all the time for calling things C64 cracks when they should just be "releases" (even though between them and me I probably know the definitions longer than they have been in the scene ;)).
|
| |
iopop
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 317 |
ok, that explains it..
if the revisionists want to have it that way , let them sort out which games really had protection in the past. :)
sorry for being compleltey off topic.. |
| |
Jazzcat
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1044 |
Iopop: yep. let them work it out. :)
The most important thing of this thread however is the missing "intro coder", "intro graphician", "intro musician" which we could use for cracks. So many intros are unsung.
|
| |
A3
Registered: Dec 2005
Posts: 362 |
And somthing that I really miss is an option to add translated by. As if someone takes the time to translate a game from one language to english, they really should be credited for that. |
| |
Jazzcat
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1044 |
Yup. Even more work is repainting graphics from one language to another.
__Will the CSDB admin even check my PMs or this thread?__
|
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 - Next |
