[Rarity Guide] Roundtable Discussion: 'Seperate Entries'

[AtariBuff]

As Hydr0x and myself were mentioning this in another thread I would like to start a nice roundtable discussion about the following topic:

"Seperate Entries for:
a) special (limited) editions?
b) press releases (press kits)?
c) (PAL) country variants which are called other then the english release?
d) re-releases?
in the Digital Press Collector's Guide"

My opinion on the matter:
On a TRUE collector's point of view (like myself with the PAL PS1) it is essential to mention points a) c) and d) in seperate entries.

My POV:
a) Special/limited editions always have some goodies; the packaging differs; sometimes the front cover/manual/medium differs
b) i'm open to suggestions on this one
c) I come across this in the PS1 PAL list pretty often: "Legend of Foresia" for example is the french release of "Blaze & Blade" (english release) - the in-game front screen says the respective title, country specific text has been changed, who knows what else code differs - for me a seperate entry
d) Seems over the top at first BUT for example: "TOCA Touring Car Championship" got re-released as "Platinum" with compatibility for the Dual-Shock controller which wasn't available when the original release came on the market. Another one: "Air Combat" got re-released as "Value" with different front cover and manual artwork. And fanatic collectors simply want to hunt down every version of a released game.

I would love to start a nice discussion with our boss Joe and all DP editors involved.
Game On :)

[anagrama]

Personally, I'm happy keeping all such variations for the description field, but I appreciate that it's much less of an issue with my sections than with some others.

The problem with listing every alternate European release is that for some lists, like the SNES, every 1st-Party game will have 5 or 6 different entries, making the list very "messy" aswell as very time-consuming and awkward to browse if it's spread across 20 or more pages in the online database (especially with the current set-up that would require clicking "Next" on every single page in order to get o the last few titles).

Also, the problem listing re-issues etc. is knowing where to draw the line between a re-issue and a variation - for example, with the Master System list, I could possibly understand (though would prefer not to) listing the Sega Classics & Kixx titles seperately, but then what about the US Gold games with alternate-style covers? Or the German-language covers? Or Portugese variations? Or the 5/8 language variations? Or those with/without the "Now there are no limits text"? Or with/without the (R) trademark on the back?
Obviously some of those are more important than others, but rather than having to decide where to draw the line in each different case, it's much easier to just say "1 entry per game" and list the important variations within.

I'd be interested to hear any other views, but I suspect it will be hard to define an overall policy that everyone would agree with...

[hydr0x]

my POV

a) special (limited) editions?

you gotta split that up into LE that DO have extra content (*) (like additional hardware or bonus levels or bonus dvds) and ones that DO NOT have any extra content but just a different box (**)

(*) should have a seperate entry (and in fact i'm doing this for Gamecube, SNES and Dreamcast) (examples are Sega Bass Fishing, Samba De Amigo, Puchi Carat, KoF Maximum Impact)

(**) should NOT have a seperate entry (example would be Transformers for the PS2)

b) press releases (press kits)?

there's actually a rule on that (although not in the FAQ, the faq needs an update :P )
1) of course they DO NOT count as final released games
2) if they are full preview versions of a released game > no adding to the guide
3) if they are full preview versions of an unreleased game > proto section
4) if they are NOT full versions > demo section

c) (PAL) country variants which are called other then the english release?

there's a rule for those too.
1) Pure title translations (Lion King / König der Löwen) > same entry, add in description and as AKA
2) same game with different game title in game AND on box > seperate entry
3) same game with different box but same disc/cart/rom > same entry, add in description and as AKA
4) different game with same name -> seperate entry
5) same packaging but different internal data (rom/disc/cart...) > same entry, add in description and as AKA

d) re-releases?
well, you have two cases again with this, first, the ones re-released without ANY changes other than the box(art) (*), and then the ones with internal changes like the ones you mentioned (**)

(*) should definately NOT have a seperate entry, they are just variants, add them to the description

(**) i'm not decided on these, i see your point, but i think they should be variants only too, see, otherwise i would have to add a new entry for every damn SNES game that got rom revisions, most of those you can't even distinguish just from the box, you have to look at the back of the cart to see it :/

let's wait for Joe to comment on all :)

[anagrama]

The main problem here is the inherent difficulty in trying to find a "one-size-fits-all" policy for 40+ different systems over 30 years with something like 20+ different editors, especially since the DP guide shifted from being primarily focused on US Releases to being a worldwide information resource - what makes perfect sense for one format will be counter-intuitive for another, and there will always be possible exceptions to any given rule.

One idea that might be helpful is for one or two people to be appointed "overseers" of the guide/database, who are there to make sure every section fits together as best as possible and are all internally consistent, especially since Joe is understandably pressed for time at the moment given his new responsibilities/priorities and can't be fairly expected to make a seperate judgement in each individual case.

[hydr0x]

James i see your point about the diversity, but i still think what i posted works for all lists

about the overseer, not a bad idea, although i wouldn't know who :/