Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Split alternate names into separate games #600

Closed
tzizi opened this issue Jul 28, 2018 · 2 comments
Closed

Split alternate names into separate games #600

tzizi opened this issue Jul 28, 2018 · 2 comments

Comments

@tzizi
Copy link
Contributor

tzizi commented Jul 28, 2018

While trying to split up the name section in original games in a fashion similar to this comment, I came across alternate names, which made things a bit complicated.

It seems most of the time it's used as a way to batch up similar games, for example with Neverwinter Nights.

However, if someone were to make another remake of Neverwinter Nights (or any of the other related games), they'd have to split up the games, unless they supported every game xoreos supported as well.

One way to go about this is to split them into separate games, but add a related property, that would batch them up as they were previously, however, this doesn't really fix the issue.

Another option would be simply to make the remakes specify all the games they remake. I personally prefer this option, as if #596 is implemented, it would allow specifying an alternate status for every game it supports.

While I understand the appeal of batching up, I personally believe it makes things a little bit less organized. However, if it's important, we could also batch up games that only one remake implements (or more than one, as long as they remake the exact same games). This would probably take more work though.

@cxong
Copy link
Member

cxong commented Jul 30, 2018

I think this is a legacy of when games couldn't remake multiple games. Moving forward we should just split everything.

@tzizi
Copy link
Contributor Author

tzizi commented Jul 30, 2018

Alright, I'll do it that way then :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants