«

[DarthHelmet86]

Originally Posted by Japo

Approving or rejecting a game has never been about which particular updater was online at the moment, and how did he "feel like" about the game.

If it's to be that these games are rejected, OK, but it has to be a definite criterion. About games with expansions, I still think they will catch us pants down, if we don't decide how to handle them. So far we have been deciding on the already abandoned ones on a per case basis, instead of having any rule like for the rest, as we should.

I wasn't saying hey lets all just do what we want, rather lets not bicker like children over a game that is being sold anyway.

[Japo]

Originally Posted by DarthHelmet86

I wasn't saying hey lets all just do what we want, rather lets not bicker like children over a game that is being sold anyway.

I haven't done so, nor called anyone bickering and childish (really you shouldn't do that at the first glint of disagreement, as a rule of thumb, let alone to people older than you). I figured we could discuss this simple matter without anyone feeling bad about it, even if we don't agree, O_O this isn't politics or religion, chaps.

Originally Posted by TotalAnarchy

Expansions were sold, shareware episodes were not.

Yes, they were.

there's also the fact that abandonware in AB rules implies it was commercially distributed at a time, which shareware was obviously not.

If you mean the additional episodes, you were charged for them. If you mean the initial episode, they were "commercially distributed" as long as that doesn't mean exactly the same as "sold for a sum".

Anyway I'm just trying to make my points, it doesn't mean I feel hard about this, and I'm not going to drag this discussion forever. Myself however I'd be in favor of a poll (first one public, then maybe one for staff, then let the admins decide); we're talking as if this were a positivist philosophic matter, if shareware should be on the site, when it's completely discretionary.

[Professor Oak]

From now on, could I recommend that the term 'The Ultimate Doom' or 'TUD' be used to describe the first Doom game, so that people will not get confused between that and the 1 episode shareware edition?

[TotalAnarchy]

Originally Posted by Professor Oak

From now on, could I recommend that the term 'The Ultimate Doom' or 'TUD' be used to describe the first Doom game, so that people will not get confused between that and the 1 episode shareware edition?

That would be totally incorrect. Both Ultimate Doom and original Doom have the right to be on AB.

[Professor Oak]

Originally Posted by TotalAnarchy

That would be totally incorrect. Both Ultimate Doom and original Doom have the right to be on AB.

However, the chances of getting an original copy of Doom is near impossible, The Ultimate Doom is the more well-known version of it.

[TotalAnarchy]

Originally Posted by Professor Oak

However, the chances of getting an original copy of Doom is near impossible, The Ultimate Doom is the more well-known version of it.

That doesn't allow us to change game titles... If you can't find the original Doom, then just review Ultimate Doom, which will be referred to as Ultimate Doom onsite. I know there was the case with Blood-One Unit Whole Blood, but what you suggest is actually the opposite of that.

[Professor Oak]

It has been agreed that Doom and The Ultimate Doom are two different products, and therefore, if such a article are made for them, they would need to have two different reviews for them. I'm just wondering how many people have a copy of the original Doom though.

[Professor Oak]

Originally Posted by Professor Oak

It has been agreed that Doom and The Ultimate Doom are two different products, and therefore, if such a article are made for them, they would need to have two different reviews for them. I'm just wondering how many people have a copy of the original Doom though.

An update on this is that Doom and The Ultimate Doom will share the same article, on the basis that a review is done for this, with The Ultimate Doom being simply an additional section to the Doom article, should be simpler that way.

[TotalAnarchy]

As far as expansions go, a couple were already approved, Wages of Sin for SiN and Hellfire for Diablo come to mind. But there is a factor which in my opinion doesn't allow us to associate shareware episodes with expansions. Expansions were sold, shareware episodes were not. Not mentioning the fact that noone considers these episodes as separate full games, there's also the fact that abandonware in AB rules implies it was commercially distributed at a time, which shareware was obviously not.

Now this makes things interesting. There's the problem with Commander Keen again. Thus I'd advise we should not make separate pages for every episode, but rather for every batch. Eps 1,2,3 were clearly sold as Commander Keen: Invasion of the Vorticons, and 4 and 5 were Commander Keen: Goodbye Galaxy! So I'd suggest we review them as 3D Realms themselves distributes them:

- http://www.3drealms.com/keen1/
- http://www.3drealms.com/keen4/

...plus the others which were distributed separately (3.5, 6)

Now regarding the aforementioned expansion. Doing reviews for them is not exactly a problem. The problem occurs that they can't be run without the original game (both Diablo and SiN are sold), and current policy doesn't allow us to upload ISOs/cd images, but only the zipped installed folder. So how will we get out of this situation.

[Professor Oak]

Originally Posted by TotalAnarchy

Now regarding the aforementioned expansion. Doing reviews for them is not exactly a problem. The problem occurs that they can't be run without the original game (both Diablo and SiN are sold), and current policy doesn't allow us to upload ISOs/cd images, but only the zipped installed folder. So how will we get out of this situation.

If I'm honest, if the expansions are not being sold or there is little interest for them in regards to those who released them, then I would say that the submission of ISOs for them should be reasonable until such a time when such expansions are once again sold. However, this topic could do with a little bit of discussion from both sides of the divide in regards to policy.