| |
grennouille
Registered: Jul 2008
Posts: 222 |
Naming releases
For me a game WITHOUT trainer and WITH Dox should be name : nameofthegame +D. For a game with 1 trainer and docs it should be named : nameofthegame +1D. Any toughts about it? |
|
... 3 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Mace
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 1799 |
One could also wonder: "Does it matter?"
If you see 'D', 'docs' or '%' in the filename, you know what's going on, don't you?
Same with +8, ++ or whatever.
Why do you need to know the exact number of trainers, without having a look at the file itself? |
| |
daison
Registered: May 2005
Posts: 90 |
Why could it matter?
Because you can then easily sort on the number of trainers for example. This way you could easily see what group did the most. Also the search options Skate mentioned might also come in handy for some people.
Still, it will be hard to maintain, especially for existing data and if you can't rely on it, you can still wonder what's it's worth then... |
| |
Mace
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 1799 |
Go to 'advanced search', type the name of your desired game and check the list.
I tried Terminator and found 'Exterminator', 'Terminator' and 'Terminator 2'.
Sorted... by number of trainers ;-)
So yeah, it's good to add some number of trainers, but it already works rather okay the way it is now.
IMHO, that is, of course ;-) |
| |
daison
Registered: May 2005
Posts: 90 |
Sorting It kind of works out as long as you put a space between the name and the + (always a plus).
Back at the original question. If you would put +1 instead of a plus, the current sorting might fail when there also ++ entries around.
select * from releases order by name
might then result in (for example):
Terminator
Terminator +
Terminator ++
Terminator +1
Terminator +1D
Terminator +2
Terminator +2
Terminator +D
It's obvious that the list is not very well sorted, mostly due to naming inconsistencies. So either be very strict in naming, or have the trainers, docs etc as separate db fields in order to be able to sort correctly.
I don't have a solid opinion on the importance of this all, I'm just pointing out that having release attributes like number of trainers, docs etc stored separately can be beneficial.
|
| |
Mace
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 1799 |
My point is that such lists as above are not too long.
You can figure out yourself what the release with the most trainers is just by looking at it :-)
But hey... I'm not that interested in this kind of information anyway, so perhaps I'm the wrong guy to join this discussion ;-) |
| |
tnu
Account closed
Registered: Jan 2010
Posts: 42 |
..another thing that comes to mind is, when adding a release that has been trained in some way, my feeling is
[releasename] + ....when trainer is optional..
[releasename] trainer ...when game is released trained only...
..regardless what year it was release.... |
| |
Skate
Registered: Jul 2003
Posts: 494 |
@cc85: trained only? can you give me an example of that? I'm not saying it doesn't exist, I've just never seen such a crack. |
| |
Mace
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 1799 |
Skate: Asterix and the Magic Cauldron Trainer |
| |
tnu
Account closed
Registered: Jan 2010
Posts: 42 |
@Skate: ...there are,as Mace hinted on,many examples.
|
| |
The Shadow
Registered: Oct 2007
Posts: 304 |
Back in the day there was never a reason to indicate (with a number) trainers with fewer than 2. +1 simply was not used because it is redundant. Whenever I released something with only one trainer, it was simply named with a +. + indicates the presence of a trainer. Trainers with two or more options were +2, +3, +4, etc. I still use this method today. |
| Previous - 1 | 2 - Next |
