New Wiki material: software/games

Page 3/7
1 | 2 | | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

By ren

Paragon (1217)

ren's picture

06-03-2018, 16:52

To be clear: I was not planning to add loads of sw pages (I'd rather work on my own site instead then Wink) (But would leave the matter open of people picking up, and starting adding pages..)

So yes, that's a good focus: let SW/game pages arise naturally from a need (to supply information that's difficult to find elsewhere, or when stuff comes forth from a forum discussion over here - like it did now basically, from the unsafe PSG port directions thread).

Regarding the latter: I think it would be great if stuff finds it's way to the wiki more often (cross-referencing the source/forum thread). Information is less likely to get lost that way, stuff is sometimes hard to find (back) in the forums.

Regarding GenMSX duplication: I am of the opinion that when there's a page being created, some basic info is nice to supply anyway (rather than someone has to visit GenMSX separately for that). But perhaps my specs template is too broad (example).

And yes, perhaps Generation MSX could be improved/extended a bit to offer room/space for patches & fixes stuff, but I could also live with this wiki page over here solution.

@rderooy: will come back at you.

By mars2000you

Enlighted (5489)

mars2000you's picture

06-03-2018, 16:56

We don't need to create multiple categories for the games/applications, based on the companies that have released them, or not even only the 'main' company that has released them. The only new required categories (and not sub-categories) are 'Games' and 'Applications' in replacement of 'Software'.

(I've already said that, but as you have re-introduced them in your example, I need to say it again)

By ren

Paragon (1217)

ren's picture

06-03-2018, 17:20

I reintroduced them simply to restore my original page for now, but indeed, when the aim is not to have en exhaustive list of released SW in the wiki, then those categories are not (that) relevant.

Would you agree when e.g. an SD Snatcher page would be created, adding it to the (existing) Konami category would make sense?

Btw: I see the Konami Software Club publication pages (which are on GenMSX as well) (but perhaps published later than the wiki entries here). If you would put these in a Konami Publications category, your pages list in the main Konami category would thin out, providing more overview Wink

So to me the (sub)categories Konami Hardware & Konami Publication already make sense.. (yeah, sometimes you have to click 1 extra time... But you do get more overview, and arguably better organization).

And then there's the matter of Konami vs Category:Konami, but I believe there was a discussion on this already a while ago..(?)

By mars2000you

Enlighted (5489)

mars2000you's picture

06-03-2018, 18:25

ren wrote:

And then there's the matter of Konami vs Category:Konami, but I believe there was a discussion on this already a while ago..(?)

Problem resolved with redirecting (I guess that it was forgotten at some moment in the past)

Quote:

Would you agree when e.g. an SD Snatcher page would be created, adding it to the (existing) Konami category would make sense?

It could be added to the Konami category. More exactly the existing link to Generation MSX for this game on this page should be replaced by the link to this new page, and the new page should include a link to Generation MSX. There's no any problem there, no need to make the things more difficult to handle!

It's better to have all Konami products on the same page than on 3 pages. And it's not a problem to add the publications, just a table to copy/paste! (and already made!)

By ren

Paragon (1217)

ren's picture

06-03-2018, 18:52

The redirect makes sense I guess. But copy/pasting the contents of Konami Software Club into the Konami category (thus duplicating content / having the (exact) same content in 2 places) is not a very good idea..

By mars2000you

Enlighted (5489)

mars2000you's picture

06-03-2018, 18:50

I agree, but I wanted to show you the result of too many critics! So, I will invert that!

By gdx

Prophet (2926)

gdx's picture

07-03-2018, 00:09

I do not understand why we separate "scene software" from other software. We did not separate "hardware scene" from other hardware. Would not it be better to classify the same way?
That is to say like: Software -> MSX1 / MSX2 / MSX2+ / MSX Turbo R software.
And that does not prevent to separate "scene software" from other software if you prefer.

By mars2000you

Enlighted (5489)

mars2000you's picture

07-03-2018, 00:18

That's simply impossible with many demodisks and diskmagazines, because on the same disk, you can find demos, utilities and/or games for different MSX generations.

Example: The Dragon Disk 01 is mainly a MSX2 product, but includes 2 demos only for MSX2+ or MSX Turbo R.

For the rest of the scene software, there are other reasons that Wolf will for sure explain you. The design of this part of the Wiki has been made by Wolf and other developers of the Dutch scene, I think they are in a best position than the users to decide what is the best option for the scene software.

By gdx

Prophet (2926)

gdx's picture

07-03-2018, 00:21

mars2000you wrote:

That's simply impossible with many demodisks and diskmagazines, because on the same disk, you can find demos, utilities and/or games for different MSX generations.

Example: The Dragon Disk 01 is mainly a MSX2 product, but includes 2 demos only for MSX2+ or MSX Turbo R.

It's possible and even simple. Software may be in several categories. This is already the case for a lot of pages currently.

By mars2000you

Enlighted (5489)

mars2000you's picture

07-03-2018, 00:30

gdx wrote:
mars2000you wrote:

That's simply impossible with many demodisks and diskmagazines, because on the same disk, you can find demos, utilities and/or games for different MSX generations.

Example: The Dragon Disk 01 is mainly a MSX2 product, but includes 2 demos only for MSX2+ or MSX Turbo R.

It's possible and even simple. Software may be in several categories. This is already the case for a lot of pages currently.

You don't understand. A diskmagazine or a demodisk is an assembly of several different software. An unique page explains the content while specifying the MSX generation and/or the used screens.

To make what you suggest, the content of the unique page should be dispersed on many different pages (and it should even worse with the diskmagazines including many small MSX-BASIC programs!), without a global overview of the unique product. All the magic of this unique product should be lost, and that's only one aspect that makes the scene software different from the commercial software.

Besides, don't forget that a demodisk or a diskmagazine is the electronic version of a paper magazine. With your vision, we should also multiply the pages for each paper magazine, at least for the software part! And to make the things even more comlplex, some paper magazines (MCM, MSX Club Magazine especially) have a disk version with generally extra software!!!

Page 3/7
1 | 2 | | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7