| |
Jammer
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 1335 |
Credits for 'packer' in productions.
Me and Volcano/EXON discussed briefly this issue and agreed that credits for packing/depacking system, used in production, wouldn't be a bad idea. Akin to loader's case, it's often done by someone else than prod's coder and used in multiple releases. Among pety things like 'testing' or 'storyboard' another little position doesn't seem to be too much. What do you think? |
|
| |
ThunderBlade
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 77 |
I thought about this too. I think when someone releases a packer or a loader he expects people to use it, but does he expect to get credited all the time? I'm not sure.
When I released Ultraflash-Noter V3.0 Featuring Live-(De)Crunching, I got some credits for "Code" when people put out their music in my noter. I didn't think it was necessary. But that's just me. :) |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
there also should be credits for the guy who wrote the assembler that was used! and dont forget to credit whoever wrote the tracker you were using in all your music entries. |
| |
T.M.R
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 749 |
Nah, if we start crediting for tools used then every entry will become cluttered with credits and some poor sods are going to have their pages inundated with credits for stuff their tools were used on; look at Krill's entry and all those "(loader)" credits or all the SEUCK games crediting Chris Yates for code as examples.
A link to the tool(s) used in Production Notes might be a better option perhaps...? |
| |
Jammer
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 1335 |
So remove all loader credits in prods. If there's shitload of credits for, why not this? ;] A paradise for credits' filling nazis, I'd say ;] All in all it's just one little position to choose from - no one would be forced to use it (as with loader). |
| |
T.M.R
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 749 |
Quoting JammerSo remove all loader credits in prods. If there's shitload of credits for, why not this? ;] A paradise for credits' filling nazis, I'd say ;] All in all it's just one little position to choose from - no one would be forced to use it (as with loader).
Personally i'd prefer to see those credits removed; poor Krill and Chris Yates have their actual body of work lost somewhere deep within that thicket of stuff they weren't involved with directly. Imagine if you put out a music editor and suddenly nobody can tell which releases you actually worked on because over half of your CSDb entry was there as (music routine)! |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
Quote:Personally i'd prefer to see those credits removed
this.
Quote:poor Krill and Chris Yates have their actual body of work lost somewhere deep within that thicket of stuff they weren't involved with directly.
every time i look at the entry for hubbard or <insert popular composer from 80s> i have to cry for the same reason.... basically it makes those entries completely useless. to me anyway. |
| |
T.M.R
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 749 |
Okay, so how about a system to flag credits so we can differentiate between which releases people worked on directly or not? A filter option on the scener entry page could then remove all that "clutter" or preferably be on as default?
Yeah, the odds are against it i know but hey ho... =-) |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
i'm sure perff will implement it before 2050 =) |
| |
Bitbreaker
Registered: Oct 2002
Posts: 508 |
Basically, there's just three credits that are worth mentioning: code, code and code
The rest are lazy bums that don't finish their work in time anyway :-D No need for loader, storyboard and all that shit. If you want to give proper credits for that, note it in the demo. or do even a demopart about it. One could also think of a "tools used for this production" section, aside of all the credits. Then $people can wank on that section and we can enjoy silence again :-)
Also, usually you get physical love or even more for your tools on your favourite parties. |
| |
iAN CooG
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 3193 |
This db is also for giving correct credits when the release authors credited wrong ppl or even not crediting anyone, that's why it's important IMHO to state who's who even if not involved directly in the production. I can't stress enough that the ability to cross check the credits helps a lot. |
| |
ThunderBlade
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 77 |
The "releases released" section could be the place to use to list those productions where the contributors actually, actively and willingly contributed. :)
The "credits" section then would be for all the rest. Especially for musicians, that would be the place for all the prods listed where someone used their music without them giving permission or being otherwise actively involved.
Just thoughts. |
| |
Dr.j
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 277 |
im totally think different from you guyz Jammer/Thunderblad. for ex. i think "Krill" is happy with the credit for his incredible loader. i still don't see any trouble for keep crediting him or other even though they are not involved personally in the project. if today i use Rob Hubbard music
why not to give him the appropriate mention ? there is true
in what Bitbreaker said. if you want to thank your tools or packer or depacker or your glass of beer or your beer you have boozed so nobody really stop you by doing this |
| |
MagerValp
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1078 |
I can't speak for anyone else, but as someone who has released a couple of tools that occasionally get used, I never expect credits on CSDb when my tools are used. It's better to reserve credits for those who were directly involved during creation.
IMHO, if you want to thank someone, use the greetings part. |
| |
Dr.j
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 277 |
@MagerValp: i think the majority of authors (in this case: coders) will be pleased to see their names even 20 yrs after they released the tool/music/loader whatsoever. why shouldn't we actually not thank him? ..maybe is a question of perspective and manners. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
try to think it through.... where does it stop? if the guy who coded the packer deserves credit, does the guy who coded the ml-monitor deserve it too? and the guy who coded the graphics program? and then there is someone who coded the kernal routines almost every crack intro is using, what about them?
srsly, its messy enough as it is. i'd really like to be able to find out what releases someone actually actively contributed to by looking at his db entry. i _know_ that hubbard and tel and jch were extremely popular and everyone used their tunes. really. |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
Yes, it is messy enough as it is. I totally agree (with GPZ). |
| |
Dr.j
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 277 |
@Frantic: GRP refereed to Jammer (i believe) , i only refereed to loader credit which is see wise legitimate. i haven't say to give credit to Tool or packer or depacker or Ml-Monitor, on the contrary i think the over usage of unneeded credits isn't so blessed . like Bitbreaker
wrote if you want to give extraordinary credit , so write him on your greetings part |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
you dont make sense. WHY exactly is the loader more important than the packer or the music routine? |
| |
enthusi
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 677 |
Quote: you dont make sense. WHY exactly is the loader more important than the packer or the music routine?
Wasnt that the original point?
There _is_ a loader credit but no packer credit.
I, too, think its more logical to remove the loader credit rather than adding a new one (and also remove quite some more from the hilarious list). |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
now if only someone would have the balls to actually do it.... |
| |
Dr.j
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 277 |
GPZ: i dunno exactly why , i believe due to de facto , maybe (im guessing) b'coz the enormous list of packers around versus a little items of great loaders . but honestly i can't put my finger on on the reason for this state (for not crediting packers however crediting loaders) |
| |
Jammer
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 1335 |
Trimming down some credits isn't dumb either, I agree ;] I just don't buy option that loader is and packer isn't ;) |
| |
Hein
Registered: Apr 2004
Posts: 954 |
All your consistency are belong to another boss. Still trying, though. |
| |
Jammer
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 1335 |
Everything is relative :P Consistency is either 0 or 1 ;) |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2241 |
Having met Krill a couple of times, I never took him for a statwanker/vain person. I can't and won't speak for him but I guess(!), he should be fine with people crediting him in the release.
Otherwise, pretty much what the DON'T people say. Do we want to credit a few thousand releases to MacBacon because ACME was used? Naaah.
About music: Though I see the point in the argument, game musicians of the 1980s have nothing to do with nowadays productions, I think, some easy way of finding the used tunes in the database is great. However, the "SIDs used in this release" field with HVSC paths, is much more interesting/direct/helpful than being able to evaluate stats for the question if Hubbard or JT were (ab)used more often. |
| |
Smasher
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 520 |
I'll credit my mum for creating me :) |
| |
Moloch
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 2928 |
Covered in other threads already, we don't need more credit options but less. |
| |
algorithm
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 705 |
Perhaps as someone may have mentioned in this thread before, to have the author give extended credits in the "production notes" section |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
@TheRyk: Well, in the case of assemblers, at least there is no code in the final production that comes from the author of the assembler. In the case of e.g. loaders the loader code is actually part of the release. Same thing for depacker code. So your analogy does not quite hold. Not every tool used as part of creating a production actually forms a part of the production.
Having said that I still think it makes better sense not to include loader credits either. If someone wrote a custom loader for some particular production, there is still the ordinary "code" credit for that...
Why oh why do I respond to this pointless discussion. I need professional help! :D |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
yes |
