| |
Scout
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 1570 |
Group id #223 : Protovision
There are some entries from Protovision that should be deleted from the database.
Those entries are commercial releases (without a downloadlink) and not scenereleases.
---
-= Silicon Ltd. =-
http://forum.siliconlimited.com
Commodore 64 Scenemusic Podcast
http://8bitmayhem.blogspot.com/ |
|
... 71 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Sixx
Registered: May 2005
Posts: 229 |
Quote: @ Mace:
Quote:Hehehe, touché... pity 'time' isn't a criterion either :)
It was just in response to Sixx writing "F4CG are still around" after claiming Protovision doesn't belong here.
Time is indeed irrelevant, but I personally wouldn't shout too loud about Protovision not belonging here if my last recorded release dated back to sometime in the previous century. :)
Curse those pesky statistics, eh?
I was talking about the scene as whole, not just C64 scene activities.
Aaaand, i find all other opinions than mine R E T A R D E D.
=) |
| |
TNT
Account closed
Registered: Oct 2004
Posts: 189 |
Quote: you read what Groepaz said, eh?.... now eat your words! :P
To answer your question and suggestion: Yes. No.
My post was half joking, but exceptions in rules are just that - exceptions which happen to fit ideas of those writing rules. |
| |
Sledge
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 102 |
Should we agree to close this thread now? Atleast until we have thought this over and have a normal discussion around this matter? Ok? |
| |
Twoflower
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 434 |
What is there to discuss - really?
1) Protovision belongs here. They are a part of the scene.
2) Their scenerelated stuff belongs here.
3) Their commercial-spots do not belong here. Can somebody please wipe them, unless it's done allready? |
| |
MorGorr
Account closed
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 47 |
Quote: pretty funny how those who demand "respect" from the scene (in the sense of the scene not making their productions available for public download) turn around just to call the scene a bunch of "retarded introlinking friends" :=)
hint: that wont earn you respect at all. bye.
I never called the "scene", as such, a bunch of anything.
On the one hand, I was talking about "retarded introlinkers". You know what I mean and you know that it exists. You also know that not all "sceners" belong to that group any I never said that.
On the other hand, I was talking about "your introlinking friends" because from what you said it seemed to me that you have more respect even for a simple introlink with no extras (20 minutes of work) than for game creation (months of work). Your rules say you "very much prefer" modified versions, without any quality criterion while originals are admitted only "exceptionally". I can live very well without a database with such rules (and BTW I don't need the "bye"s of people I have never been in contact with anyway, except PMs they nobly ignored).
You also know that game modifications (what you call cracks) and of course the games themselves can have very diverse levels of quality. However, to give just a very obvious example, starting at the low end of the scale, you will agree that even very bad games often have more value than a simple introlink without extras.
Logic says that everyone should be respected for the work they do and the value they create. I am not generalizing anything, I am just challenging your logic. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11386 |
Quote:
On the other hand, I was talking about "your introlinking friends" because from what you said it seemed to me that you have more respect even for a simple introlink with no extras (20 minutes of work) than for game creation (months of work). Your rules say you "very much prefer" modified versions, without any quality criterion while originals are admitted only "exceptionally". I can live very well without a database with such rules (and BTW I don't need the "bye"s of people I have never been in contact with anyway, except PMs they nobly ignored).
You also know that game modifications (what you call cracks) and of course the games themselves can have very diverse levels of quality. However, to give just a very obvious example, starting at the low end of the scale, you will agree that even very bad games often have more value than a simple introlink without extras.
Logic says that everyone should be respected for the work they do and the value they create. I am not generalizing anything, I am just challenging your logic.
you are still missing the point. this isnt about respecting the work of those who make quality games. infact, i personally have much more respect for those who do a decent game, than for those who call introlinking "cracking". and i'd even go as far as calling the latter utterly lame.
however, in the context of csdb that is irrelevant. the point is that crackers and their cracks, no matter how lame they are (quality is irrelevant in the context of csdb), are part of what most people refer to as "the scene". and commercial game producers aren't. csdb (tries to) document the scene and their productions. commercial games and their producers are out of the scope of csdb. if you want that, go to gamebase. and if that isnt good enough, make your own site.
|
| |
Trazan
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 620 |
I see the "discussion" is repeating itself over and over, the thread is really not going anywhere.. |
| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3057 |
Trazan, on the contrary I think that last two posts from Morgorr and Groepaz came as close as possible to some kind of consensus. Which I find very positive. |
| |
MorGorr
Account closed
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 47 |
Groepaz, I am not talking about commercial games. I COULD argue that payware is "scene" as well but that was not my point.
You say being in the the CSBd does not imply quality. OK, then you should admit not only crap introlinks but also crap freeware games. And not as an exception, but as the rule.
You say implicitly that a crap introlink is always welcome even if you don't like it, while games are only OK "exceptionally", that is, if you DO like them and decide they are "scene".
Note that I COULD HAVE opened entries for my few (more or less crap) freeware originals and probably nobody would have said anything against it - "exceptionally" ;-)
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11386 |
Quote:
You say implicitly that a crap introlink is always welcome even if you don't like it, while games are only OK "exceptionally", that is, if you DO like them and decide they are "scene".
the exception is that we allow them if they are made by someone who also made other scene related stuff, it has nothing to do with wether we like them or not. this is way protovision as a group does have an entry here, and ocean doesnt. and my sister doesnt either, although she made a seuck game, which somehow probably even found its way into the scene :)
and no, we don't "decide" if they are "scene". it is very obvious in most cases wether they are or not (and most of the time, they are not).
if you want a database that collects all and every crappy seuck- or basic game made by people who maybe by YOUR definition are sceners.... gamebase is for you. csdb doesnt do that. |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 - Next |
