TOSEC Amiga Correction Help!!!

[DH]

Leave it alone, Once you add an extra flag, everyone will come up with hundreds of new flags to use and the qty of extra flags could end up being endless, with so many variations it would end up creating something far to complex to even work with.

Besides, that's what the extra info flag is used for.... Isn't it? Let's use that, if needed, instead of creating more work for the re-naming guys. (I can hear the cries - "I've re-named 12,679 games in TOSEC, they've added a new flag now, so it's back to number 1 again " )

[mai]

Originally Posted by PandMonium

AFAIK there is no conflict.
The problem is that we should not create a new flag for every problem we face. TNC is already a really complex set of rules (some not well designed or defined) and make it even more complex would not help.
IMHO we have to assume that there are limits in what can be stored using the setname and use just that. There are more info that could be added there, for example it would be cool to distinguish between the developer and the publisher name and probably store both.
Store not only the crack group but the group members involved would also be interesting but again and like i said it can't be all entered in the setnames. That kind of info would serve as a complement in (a more complex format) datfile and/or database.

It's just my opinion off course and i'm all for making the project better and fix our current rules as you know Nonetheless, adding the flag released has a number of drawbacks that i can remember:
* A new flag so solve a (+-) rare problem, don't think it worth's the extra complexity
* Backwards compatibility - Adding a new flag to catalog something that wasn't done before will result in a good number or older sets that probably would fit well with the flag and don't have it. It would add inconsistency between sets.
* I would need to update my tools and documents :P (this one is not really important obviously )
* The most important one IMHO is the entire concept of "released". What would it mean? Many sets were released by someone, the cracked ones and so on were always released by someone i guess. Mainly by the person/group that cracked/fixed/hacked it (would duplicate flags) i guess, sometimes by other groups.
There were spread groups and supply teams and such but, sometimes there is no point in identifying that.
Other crucial point is, if someone released something completely untouched, then it is the original set and the good dump from the original media will match the CRC, there is no point in adding a flag saying that it was released by X group when that is not true. The possibility of similar releases by different persons also exists right? I dumping something and X dumping it too somewhere else and both releasing it.

If, on the other hand, the file was different from the original then it means something was modified or hacked and the correct flag should be added.
In this New Order case, the version is different from the original right? Because the crack only works with it. Then i assume that a) it is a different version/release/revision/prototype/dump(from a different disk?)/something and the cracks take advantage on something available only on that version or were done based on that, for example to patch some specific bytes that are on different addresses on other dumps.

Indeed it is complicated to store more info in that case.
If it is really uncracked/unedited i guess it is an alternate version (why? we don't know, right?), would put it with an extra [a][New Order] or [New Order release] in more info.
If it was half cracked i guess we could use flags [cr New Order] , [b crack].
If we don't know much i would just add the more info about it.

In the other sets, they were already applied right? You're trying to rename the patches or the complete already patched sets? Will guess it is the 2nd...
In this case i would just classify/rename the setname, it is "Dragon's Lair - Escape from Singe's Castle", cracked and trained by QTX. Was NOT hacked by anyone previously so the hack flag is not well applied, right? Is there a better option? Like using the fix flag?

Clearly, if the info is relevant i would also add the more info flag discussed before, possibly the alt flag too if the case was confirmed (or better yet was to discover why it is different and the crack only works in this set, the alt descriptor, or the version or something).
So the sets would be +- similar:

...or without the alt flag. This is just a suggestion, obviously

Summarizing, my main point against release flag is that, looking deeply to what it does, it won't classify any detail about the image/setfile itself. It's just saying that it was dumped or it passed by someone or some group at a given time, right?

With crack, trained, translated, fixed and other dump flags they are indeed telling us something about the image and why it differs from an original good dump for example. This set is different from that and has this crc because it was hacked by XPTO and a fix was added by OTPX. The release flag IMHO would not add any value / proper information about the software and would possibly cause more bad than good.


So, what do you guys think of it? Please discuss! :P Want to read well documented / well-founded opinions from guys with proper knowledge about the sets/systems in this case.

(END OF SPAM! )

So short answer is NO!
OK, i let it as it is, althought its not really true.
I am against to put any group name in [more info] flag, then we get thousands of variations, and noone knows, what [New Order] means.

[PandMonium]

Again, i was just giving my opinion, justifying why, to me, i is a no.
I don't have the power to decide that just by myself and having many opinions from people in and outside the project is great to help us decide :P

[mai]

Another problem:
Currently i have this set:

Custodian (1989)(Hewson)
1170F3B4

in
Commodore Amiga - Games - [ADF] (TOSEC-v2009-12-16_CM)

Formerly it was a game compilation, as you can clearly see, if you check the ADF using a hex-viewer.
Someone has modified the disk, now we have "Custodian" only on disk.
Another indication for the modification is the datestamp of the startup-sequence.
So my question is, what to do with such disks, which were formerly a game compilaton, adding [m] flag and/or [more info] flags and keep it in
Commodore Amiga - Games - [ADF] (TOSEC-v2009-12-16_CM)
or adding [m] flag and/or [more info] flag and move it to
Commodore Amiga - Compilations - Games (TOSEC-v2009-09-01_CM)

Any suggestion?

[mai]

I have a problem with the disk labels of the game "Alien Breed 3D 2".
Currently we have this names.

Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 1 of 5)(2 Mb Program Disk)[cr Digital Corruption]
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 2 of 5)(4 Mb Program Disk)[cr Digital Corruption]
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 3 of 5)(Levels)[cr Digital Corruption]
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 4 of 5)(Game Editors)[cr Digital Corruption]
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 5 of 5)(SoundFX)[cr Digital Corruption]

In this case, i dont think, that it make any sense to name disk images like the original printed media, because the game and its HD-install asks for different disknames.
Anyway, this game is hard to rename properly, because this game has 2 different Disks 1(2MB and 4MB).

Disk 1(4MB) = TKG
Disk 1(2MB) = TKG
Disk 2 = TKG2
Disk 3 = SFX
Disk 4 = Edit

...or other way around:
If the game asks for "TKG2", how can i know which of the above disks i have to insert?



Any suggestions, how to do?

[Crashdisk]

No really perfect solution but I find it no bad ...

Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 1 of 5)(1)[cr Digital Corruption][TKG Program Disk - 2 Mb]
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 2 of 5)(1)[cr Digital Corruption][TKG Program Disk - 4 Mb][bootable]
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 3 of 5)(2)[cr Digital Corruption][Levels Disk - 2 & 4 Mb]
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 4 of 5)(3)[cr Digital Corruption][Sound FX Disk]
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 5 of 5)(4)[cr Digital Corruption][Game Editors]

or maybe more shorten:
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 1 of 5)(1)[cr Digital Corruption][Program Disk - 2 Mb]
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 2 of 5)(1)[cr Digital Corruption][Program Disk - 4 Mb][bootable]
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 3 of 5)(2)[cr Digital Corruption][Levels Disk]

[mai]

Originally Posted by Crashdisk

No really perfect solution but I find it no bad ...

thanks, meanwhile a have choosen similar solution:

Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 1 of 5)(TKG)[cr Digital Corruption][2 Mb Program Disk]
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 2 of 5)(TKG)[cr Digital Corruption][bootable][4 Mb Program Disk]
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 3 of 5)(TKG2)
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 4 of 5)(SFX)
Alien Breed 3D 2 - The Killing Grounds (1996)(Team 17 - Ocean)(AGA)(Disk 5 of 5)(Edit)

Is it for someone of you confusing?

[Crashdisk]

Originally Posted by mai

thanks, meanwhile a have choosen similar solution:


Is it for someone of you confusing?

Just a problem with your solution :

[mai]

Originally Posted by Crashdisk

Just a problem with your solution :

When is this screen shown?

Ok, i see.
This seems to be a hard one.
You get this screen, if you use 2MB version, so the disk request is different.

[Crashdisk]

Yes ^^

[mai]

I need once again opinion about some TOSEC sets.

Amy Putt Classics, The (1988)(DigiTek)(Disk 1 of 2)[cr Champs]
Amy Putt Classics, The (1988)(DigiTek)(Disk 2 of 2)[cr Champs]

Although this disks were released together by "The Champs", i would split this sets.
The main program never asks for a disk 2.
There is also no option in the program to load courses from any datadisk.
The TOSEC datadisks probably need [more info] flag [FD], because you have to exchange the courses from original program with the courses from the datadisk.
Unfortunately i cant find any info about this datadisks in the whole net.
What do you think?

[TCD]

I'm with you on this one. Something like :

Amy Putt Classics, The (1988)(DigiTek)[cr Champs]
Amy Putt Classics, The - Extra Courses (1988)(Champs)[FD]

and moving the second disk to 'Commodore Amiga - Games - Unofficial Addons & Patches' would be more like it.

[mai]

Thanks for your opinion,

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

I'm with you on this one. Something like :

Amy Putt Classics, The (1988)(DigiTek)[cr Champs]

Was my thought too.

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

Amy Putt Classics, The - Extra Courses (1988)(Champs)[FD]

and moving the second disk to 'Commodore Amiga - Games - Unofficial Addons & Patches' would be more like it.

For now, i let it stay in
Commodore Amiga - Games - [ADF] (TOSEC-v2011-03-24_CM)
till someone has a proof, that it is an official release or not.

My point of view is, that it is better to change nothing, instead of creating something wrong.

[mai]

I am about to add english version of "Sixth Sense Investigations" but i am not sure to name the disks properly.
You know, the original published Disk-version is HD-only, needs installing to HD.
I have found a version(scene created disks), which is absolutly different compared against Original.
The files are lzx-packed on 9 Disks.
I have thought about something like this:

Sixth Sense Investigations (1998)(Epic Marketing)(AGA)(Disk 1 of 9)[m HD-Install][HD]

Do you agree, or can you offering better solution, thanks.

[Crashdisk]

Originally Posted by mai

I am about to add english version of "Sixth Sense Investigations" but i am not sure to name the disks properly.
You know, the original published Disk-version is HD-only, needs installing to HD.
I have found a version(scene created disks), which is absolutly different compared against Original.
The files are lzx-packed on 9 Disks.
I have thought about something like this:

Do you agree, or can you offering better solution, thanks.

it seems appropriate.

[mai]

Originally Posted by Crashdisk

it seems appropriate.

ok thanks, maybe i should ask also my grandma to be sure.

[lilalurl]

I'll let you TOSEC guys double check but on mai's FTP/Commodore Amiga - Games - Public Domain - ADF - TOSEC-v2011-11-05

I grabbed Simon (19xx)(Buraglio, Claudio).adf after it being mentioned there:
http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?p=809553#post809553


I also saw Simon (19xx)(Buraglio, Claudio)[h Pyratronik].zip but I have not checked it.


However, when playing the non-h version, I noticed that it displays signed: Pyratonik of 4-ward on the title screen:



So I suspect the two are the same adfs. Or at least two alternatives of the same hack.

[Crashdisk]

this is not a hack :
http://hol.abime.net/hol_search.php?...developer=1243

Will be fixed ...

[lilalurl]

Ah, I blame TOSEC for misleading me

Interestingly, I did a quick online search and it seems that Claudio Buraglio has a Youtube Channel with some Amiga stuff:
http://www.youtube.com/user/pyratronik/videos

Mostly music-related.