Different game criteria

[MZ per X]

We need to work on that different game criteria.

So to ask the difficult question again: What has to change within a game's new release when compared to earlier releases for it to warrant a new game entry, instead of a new release group under the existing game entry?

First let's document what other sites are saying about this issue.

MobyGames

Different game: When either game play, perspective, and/or storyline are different than the existing entry. Graphics/Sound that are merely improved are usually not a different game. This is of course evaluated on a case-by-case basis in comparison with other versions. Particular cases to be aware of are handheld versions of console or PC games which usually are different. In general, licensed titles (like those based on movies) often are different for different platforms, especially those released in the late 80s/early 90s. If you are not sure that a certain version of a game is the same as another, don't assume it is - always try to confirm it by playing it yourself or reading reviews.

VideoGameGeek

One of the gray areas of VGG is to separate when a release is just another release of the same game or it is a new game. We developed a few rules to be used, but most of the times it will be individual calls. Again, if you have any doubt, post on the How to VGG forum and we will check it:

If the only difference is due to hardware limitations, it is a [release]
If the controls changed because of a platform change, it is a [release]
Slightly adjusted graphics and a few new scenes and locations, it is a [release]
If the gameplay is different, if there is a new genre, or a completely revamped title, it is a new [videogame]
In the case of Fighting games, the addition of new characters alone still makes it only a [release]. New mechanics makes for a new [videogame]

In another thread we already agreed on some things which do not matter for the decision about a new game entry.

• Naming
  It cannot matter whether a port or a re-release of a game own the same name like the original.
• Time of release
  It just doesn't matter if a port of a game was released 10 months after the original, or 10 years after it.
• Graphics and sound
  Cosmetical changes should not matter, otherwise every remake would be a new game when it is not. As always there are corner cases here, for instance when a game is re-released with a completely changed graphical set, like Super Mario Brothers 2, or this funny one which saw three different graphic sets in three different regions. But IMHO, if nothing else changes, a new graphics set doesn't qualify for a new game entry.
• If it is a licensed or unofficial release of the game.

Okay, that's the status quo for now, let's start developing some different game criteria. As this will always be very subjective, I think that we won't have clear-cut criteria, but a checklist of pros/cons which we can go through to make up a decision about a release.

[Ultyzarus]

Here is my input from both working MG and working on Oregami Wiki (and also as a collector)

Same Game:

• -It shouldn't matter that a game is a complete remake with 3D models, new soundtracks, as long as the story and gameplay is basically the same. (ie.Final Fantasy IV DS)
  -If a game gets extended with new material, it is still the same game, only an enhanced/upgraded version. It is like a game that has a re-release with some add-ons included.

Split Games:

• -There should be a base set of levels that is the same for two releases to be considered the same game, even if the general gameplay is the same, or similar. (ie.SUper Mario bros. vs Super Mario bros. 2 (aka The Lost Levels) and Keep the Balance (Windows version (5 items per scale) vs Game Boy Color version (4 items per scale))
  http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/keep-the-balance
  http://www.mobygames.com/game/gameboy-c ... e-balance_

Case-by-Case, can be solved by how we use the game descriptions, or simply be split. We should discuss these in the forums when the time comes to reach a concensus. Maybe there is a way to have two G entries that are actually linked in some way for those? Twin G entries, maybe

• -If the story if completely rewritten, the graphics are changed, but basically keeps the same gameplay. (ie. Super Mario bros. 2 (USA) vs Dokidoki Panic, Kamen no Ninja Hanamaru vs Yo! Noid)
  http://www.mobygames.com/game/nes/yo-noid

There is also the case of Pokémon, but that is more a title dilemma. Will the main title for Pokémon Red / Blue be Pokémon Red version, or Pokémon Blue version? We might have to create an unofficial title for those...

[Ultyzarus]

Here is an idea of how to not have two split two games made from the same base code: GT (Game Tags)

Just have the two games merged under the same entry, but split with a tab. Here is an example made from MG rap sheets (Yes the tabs are too squared XD)

[MZ per X]

Here is an idea of how to not have two split two games made from the same base code: GT (Game Tags) Just have the two games merged under the same entry, but split with a tab. Here is an example made from MG rap sheets (Yes the tabs are too squared XD)

Looks like a release group mockup to me.

I started a new section in the wiki called "Oregami Standards", and a first page under it for the different game criteria. I added the irrelevant things there, with one new: the companies involved. We can gradually expand this page based on the discussion here.

[Ultyzarus]

Here is an idea of how to not have two split two games made from the same base code: GT (Game Tags) Just have the two games merged under the same entry, but split with a tab. Here is an example made from MG rap sheets (Yes the tabs are too squared XD)

Looks like a release group mockup to me.

Except that GT would/could include many platforms. Maybe have different RG, each having different platforms rather than Each Platform having its RG?

[MZ per X]

Maybe have different RG, each having different platforms rather than Each Platform having its RG?

No. The constraint of having exacly one platform per RG is at the core of our data model. We need this limitation to have a place for all platform-specific data to be linked to. You will better understand this when we start modelling the gaming press or tech specs, which we already started discussing in the German part of the forums.

But your mockup is a cool idea for game groups.

[MZ per X]

I added pros and cons to the wiki page, both separated in major and minor items. Feel free to add things, and discuss them here.

First I added some marketing. If a new release is marketed as an update / remake / port of an existing release, it's IMHO a major con for a different game. The other way round, if this is not the case, it's only a minor pro in my book.

[Ultyzarus]

I added pros and cons to the wiki page, both separated in major and minor items. Feel free to add things, and discuss them here.

First I added some marketing. If a new release is marketed as an update / remake / port of an existing release, it's IMHO a major con for a different game. The other way round, if this is not the case, it's only a minor pro in my book.

I think what we aim for is having the least different games we can, but keep everything that is genuinely different a separate entry. I believe that puzzle games a a bit harder to deal with, but we could make split entries more frequent for this type of games, while an RPG would typically not have split games as long as it has the same story and core gameplay.

The only thing that seems to be an issue in the current data model is the "Same game, yet a different game" like Mario2 / Dokidoki Panic. If we can resolve this issue, than we have pretty much everything we need.

The aspects we see in that case are:
-Same levels
-Same gameplay
-Different Story
-Graphical change (similar to a mod)
-Marketed as a different game

The 3 last point would be what makes it a different game, yet the first two are what generally makes it the same game. Hence my Game Tabs proposal: both games appear under the same rap-sheet, but are still split and don't share RGs...

[Ultyzarus]

Maybe have different RG, each having different platforms rather than Each Platform having its RG?

No. The constraint of having exacly one platform per RG is at the core of our data model. We need this limitation to have a place for all platform-specific data to be linked to. You will better understand this when we start modelling the gaming press or tech specs, which we already started discussing in the German part of the forums.

But your mockup is a cool idea for game groups.

I have many different ideas for a page mock-up, I'll see what I can come up with

[MZ per X]

I believe that puzzle games a a bit harder to deal with, but we could make split entries more frequent for this type of games, while an RPG would typically not have split games as long as it has the same story and core gameplay.

Yes, I fully agree. Chess is Chess is Chess, you know. Puzzle and board games need special rules to allow more new game entries than we'd allow for other genres. This is true for all puzzle games without levels we could compare, prime example here is Tetris. But I'd suggest doing the "usual" games first, maybe the puzzle and board game criteria will follow naturally then.

The only thing that seems to be an issue in the current data model is the "Same game, yet a different game" like Mario2 / Dokidoki Panic. If we can resolve this issue, than we have pretty much everything we need.

Okay, let's try.

The aspects we see in that case are:
-Same levels
-Same gameplay
-Different Story
-Graphical change (similar to a mod)
-Marketed as a different game

The 3 last point would be what makes it a different game, yet the first two are what generally makes it the same game. Hence my Game Tabs proposal: both games appear under the same rap-sheet, but are still split and don't share RGs...

Quite frankly, when I read "same levels / same gameplay" for a Jump 'n Run, I'm all for the same game entry. Graphical changes we identified as not to matter, different story (for a game not story-driven) and new-release marketing would be a minor pros for a new game.

Updated the Standard accordingly, please discuss.

[MZ per X]

Iggy wrote in another thread:

While it does make sense to treat Dokidoki Panic and SMB2 as one, it is also problematic.

First of all, we have the question of intention. Is it supposed to be the same game? Of course, we have already established that a Gameboy version of a PS2 game is usually not the same game, regardless of intention.
But if Doki^2 Panic was localised as Super Mario Bros 2, and later on re-imported to Japan as Super Mario USA, we have a case of the same game being released in the same market in two very distinct versions. It's not a case of (I'm making up here) Kane's Wrath for PC, which was later re-released as Kane's Wrath: Gold with some changes in 3D models and two new levels. In that case, it stands to reason that both releases are releases or RGs of Kane's Wrath. But if SMB USA is sold in the same shelf as Dokidoki Panic, with all the main graphics replaced, along with the storyline and licencing, I think it must be counted as two games, even though they are closely related.

A second problem is licencing. First we have the technical limitation: Will Oregami have tags and genres assigned at an RG level as well as the mother game level? Because if a tag such as "licenced title" is to be inherited from Mobygames, and if SMB2 and Dokidoki Panic are to be sorted as two RGs of one game, only the latter must carry that tag.
Beside the technical limitations, what makes a licenced title tick is often the licence itself – also a case of intention. I'd like to illustrate this with another game: Astérix/Taz. It's the very same game, only the licenced character (and thereby main sprite and title screen) has changed. It's exactly the same game, but I'd still like to see them treated separately because the main ingredient (the licence) is different.

On a related note, I see little reason to split the Pokémon pairs into distinct games because the differences are minute and the licence is shared.

[Ultyzarus]

And I replied to that:

On a related note, I see little reason to split the Pokémon pairs into distinct games because the differences are minute and the licence is shared.

I'd also treat the Pokemon games as a single with a difference at R level:
Title 1: Pokemon Blue Version
Title 2: Pokemon Red Version
Title 3: Poket Monster Midori (Japanese only)
Title 4: Pokemon Generation 1 (informal title)

Another title could be

-Pokemon Red and Blue

Now the question would be: Is Pokemon Yellow (GBC) also the same game? And are Pokemon FireRed and LeafGreen also the same?
Probably, since (I think) the Only difference between Yellow and the others is The Pikachu Starter and that is on GBC (a different RG) and FireRed and LeafGreen are just enhanced remakes.

[Ultyzarus]

Here is what I see as a Game (G) definition guideline:

A G entry includes the base game, all its ports and remakes, its Add-ons and Mods (including other games that were made by using the base game with a different skin (ie Mario bros. 2 is technically an official mod of Doki Doki Panic )) and the compilations it is included in.

[MZ per X]

Here is what I see as a Game (G) definition guideline:

Okay, this sounds more like the information a game's rap sheet should contain to me.