| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
originally released in...
Dunno if anybody else cares, but personally I think it would be nice if it was able to mark tunes (and perhaps graphics too) that are used in various productions as to whether they were originally used in a certain release. For example, when browsing some older well-known composers list of releases, it is kind of disturbing to be unable to see what productions this person was involved in actively, as a co-author, so to speak, and which of the releases that come from a bunch of lamers (ayeah) that ripped the music and re-used it.
This info could also be visible from the other releases, such as "this tune was originally used in release XXX". |
|
| |
Moloch
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 2928 |
Lamers? haha ... that was standard procedure for quite a few years. (music)
Some info along the lines of "Originally released in" or "Originally created for" who be useful for CSDb, I agree. Some scener entries are just a list of releases for other groups because they created some rather popular data.
---
Crimson Twilight Dev Updates [C64 CRPG] |
| |
The Phantom
Registered: Jan 2004
Posts: 360 |
I agree with Moloch, Oddly enough.
I've had a bad start in the c64 scene, ripping this, that and the other.. I believe I was pretty straight in my earlier releases where this intro was ripped from "whomever". I often wish I hadn't started that way.
There should be a "originally used from" or whatnot. And speaking from my own constant screw ups, wouldn't this cause more stupidity and confusion?!
I know I have no right talking about stupidity, Moloch would likely confirm that (here I go, allowing buttons to be pushed). |
| |
SIDWAVE
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2238 |
You need a whole team to do this.
Do you think CSDB or HVSC is made in a few days ?
If you want that info marked down, set up a project groups to do it, and come back in 2 years when a V1.0 is ready to inject data to this.
Randomly working, unorganized on marking all this info down - then its never ever gonna happen... |
| |
iAN CooG
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 3193 |
The best we can do is to enter the *correct* sids in each demo entries so the usage list will speak by itself. We already found out correct titles, credits and release dates by doing so, the task is almost infinite btw, needs a lot of dedication. Happened a lot of time that a sid believed used first in a demo made in $year, was found in another made 1 year earlier, or attributed wrongly to a certain composer (or unknown) found finally credited to another, and so on. |
| |
SIDWAVE
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2238 |
What Ian says, and..: we can just do like we do and correct info, and wait another 10 years, to get somewhat satisfied with what we have.
OR we can go badass on this, and do a project team.
Get things achieved faster...
Anyhow, i wont be on this, got way too many things to do.. |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
Well.. It would not have to be obligatory info. So, people could just tick a little checkbox when adding stuff. Just because the whole database won't consistently be marked up with this info doesn't mean it would not be useful in those cases where it was actually specified.
Â…but Ian got a point here of course: I didn't really think of the fact that this would also require that the actual sid tune (and not just the author info) is also identified and specified for various releasesÂ… That is obviously a bit more tedious (although, again, it would still not necessarily have to be specified across the board in order to be useful).
Anyway... It was just a thought. I still find it weird to see people listed in other group's releases as if they were actually participating actively in those releases, whereas in fact they weren't. Also a bit of a blasphemy in cases where some cool guy is listed in other releases that are sometimes (but not necessarily) quite lame. :) |
| |
iAN CooG
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 3193 |
Credits are given where credits are due, even and especially if a tune was ripped and reused, most of the times in the demo you just see "music:JCH" when there's just a "player by JCH" in the binary but the tune was f.e. by DRAX, "music by unknown guy" or "charset by ???" and the likes. This is a database and all data should be entered correctly even if the demo says differently or the infos are missing completely.
And... how do you know if a musician actually contributed actively to the demo? Many, most of the times, the tunes were/are just made as standalone, and then used/selected by the demo coders even when released for the first time ever. This information can only be given from the musician himself. =) |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
Just because it is fuzzy some or even most of the time doesn't mean it cannot also be quite clear in some other cases.
But yeah.. fuck it!
> "This is a database"
Haha.. Yeah! Didn't really notice that until you told me. I thought CSDb was a space ship! |
| |
iAN CooG
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 3193 |
uh? take it easy man, I don't know what are you going mad about, if i stated the obvious was just to say that we can't enter only the things we like and those we don't like. I personally have nothing against seeing Jeroen Tel listed as a music credit in a Crypt release for example. :P
Would be worse to see a tune credited to the wrong guy who pretended to have composed it, for example stuff like this
http://csdb.dk/release/?id=91734&show=trivia |
| |
SIDWAVE
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2238 |
The most embarassing music stealing:
Shade
:D |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
@Ian: I don't think I have written anywhere that we should enter information that we "like" or "dislike"? If so, then that is a misunderstanding. If I am not mistaken, I was rather arguing for the addition of a piece of information that is currently lacking, in order to make a further distinction in cases where it is possible to do so? If this info was added, then it would be possible to filter away (in a specific database query, but not in the sense of removing this info from the database) entries that were known not to involve the affiliation of the author, in order to provide a more accurate view of a given persons own involvement in producing releases.
"Fuck it" was not an expression of anger (if that is how you interpreted it?), but merely an attempt to say that the whole issue was perhaps not so important after all. |
| |
Radiant
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 639 |
I agree with Frantic, at least in spirit. I think there should be some way of indicating whether a person actively contributed to a release, or if someone just used his/her previous work. Doesn't only apply to music. |
