| |
Burglar
Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 1085 |
the ed and joe graphic spam bomb
guys, do we really need those tons and tons of already released material to csdb? I think not.
especially when you don't even upload a file with it. if I want to see your stuff, I'll check the original production. |
|
... 80 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
DRAX
Registered: Oct 2004
Posts: 225 |
Hehe, now I better kill myself ... again ;) |
| |
Hein
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 942 |
I suppose CSDb is one of the few places to showcase this material, valued as c64 pieces. Kinda shows how unproductive others (like myself) have been past years. (Not you, Drax ;) |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11352 |
Quote:Now I still feel that the release date of those binary files should be set to 2007 and not the same as the production they were taken from but that's just my personal opinion ..
i'd vote for that aswell, if the actual files in the entry were released now, the releasedate should reflect this. |
| |
Jazzcat
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1044 |
I don't really care, as long as the release credits are accurate. |
| |
Radiant
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 639 |
So it's possible to release files retroactively? Interesting implications. |
| |
Mace
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 1799 |
Retroactively... I like that word. |
| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
Quote: So it's possible to release files retroactively? Interesting implications.
And if that's the case I demand that it also should be possible to de-release files retroactively. There are a few demos in csdb I'd rather have forgotten .. ;) |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5086 |
btw, to go against my former opinion, lets imagine this situation with a coder's work. how about releasing all your demos as seperated faders, demoparts, effects ? :) in this glance ed&joe's move doesnt seem to be so good again. |
| |
enthusi
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 677 |
since Im bored, here is my opinion:
maybe the problem is to find a rule for this.
This is an approach doomed to failure.
I.e. some VN-gfx are stunning some are just what they are: some menu-pic. Same goes for gfx in demo-arts. I.e. the Unicorn ;) Worth a stand-alon-release for sure. So it's a matter of taste/pride. If a scener feels the world should see/know/experience his work as separated part, well up to him/her. There's always the danger of blurring it all and thus decreasing the relative impact of truely stunning pieces.
It's up to ed and each and everyone if this has already happened here. It's a matter of morals. Most fonts are boring. If I worked for long on one and personally think of it as a masterpiece and its just part of some unknown intro - why not release it as font? I interpret all modern releases as "the author wants me to see this" - if it's overwhelmingly boring (to me) this has impact on my view on him and nothing more and nothing less. No harm done to the database or anything. In general I'd even say - the more the better (quite contrary to my usual believes but in peaceful harmony with this post).
Oh and keep it calm,
enthusi |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 - Next |
