[game_preservation] Cataloging Standards?

[Devin Monnens]

This is true. A lot of roms using the TOSEC or GoodTools standard identify
version differences. On most discs, the versions are listed on the inner
ring of the CD. Boxes probably aren't listed, but could be documented based
on the time it came out (for instance, variation 1 would come out in 1978
and variation 2 in 1980). Of course, if the game itself was different (say
original and re-release had bug or patch
fixes), then there would be no need to indicate a variation in the box
art and simply a variation in the game.

On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Martin Goldberg <wgungfu at gmail.com> wrote:


> It gets more complicated when you have to account for variations.  For

> example, 2600 games went through several different cart, box, and

> manual revisions over their lifetime.  There would have to be some

> kind of convention for including information like that.

>

>

> Marty

>

> On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 2:52 PM,  <ommail at cox.net> wrote:

> >

> > Thanks Devin-

> >

> > I believe that things would be much better overall with a standard naming

> convention for cataloging.  I can speak to the LoC guys doing digital and

> physical preservation, and forward their thoughts.

> >

> > Actually, I don't think it matters at all what type of digital documents

> we have--that's kind of the point--there should be a standard cataloging

> format for *any* type of archive information--this way it can all be

> cross-referenced.  Here's an example:

> >

> > Catalog the following, in a standardized format, fully cross-referenced:

> > *  3 copies of  Wing Commander 3-PC, by Origin/EA, 1995-4 CD-Roms, box,

> booklets, warranty card, etc.

> > *  2 copies of  Wing Commander 3-3Do, by Origin/EA, 1995-4 CD-Roms, box,

> booklets, warranty card, etc.

> > *  1 copy of  Wing Commander 3-Playstation, by Origin/EA, 1995-4 CD-Roms,

> box, booklets, warranty card, etc.

> > *  2 copy of Wing Commander III Deluxe Edition-PC by Origin/EA 1995-all

> of the above, plus WC3 poster, calendar, Behind-the-screens-CD, Origin Audio

> CD 3, all in a limited edition film canister.

> > *  1 original master script from Wing Commander 3, Frank DePalma/Terry

> Borst, 22 August 94 (160 pgs)

> > *  1 costume 'Kilrathi' prop head, non-animatronic, used in the filming

> of Wing Commander 3, Latex, w/hair-1994

> > *  3 pairs costume 'Kilrathi' prop hands,  used in the filming of Wing

> Commander 3, Latex, w/hair-1994

> > *  1 'Hobbes' costume 'Kilrathi' prop head, animatronic (mechanism

> missing),used in the filming of Wing Commander 3, Latex, w/hair-1994

> > *  2 Large/5 small  35mm film reels, alternate takes of cinematic scenes

> from filming of Wing Commander 3, 1994-Negative prints (total estimated

> running time-28 minutes)

> > *  3 digital data disks (CD-Rom)-contains "Origin Systems/Creative

> Services" images used to create advertising and box covers for Wing

> Commander III-1994

> > *   1 'Zanart'- framed foil artwork of Wing Commander 3 game cover

> > *  1 VHS video, Mark Hammil appearing on the Today Show, promoting Wing

> Commander III--1995

> > *  1 large Wing Commander 3 promotional poster prototype

> > *  8 35mm slides containing hi-rez images of original Wing Commander 3

> box artwork (by Yeates)

> >

> > See where this can get tricky?  So far I haven't found anything that fits

> completely, but I'd rather use an already established standard (like LoC),

> rather than creating yet another new one.

> >

> > Joe

> >

> > ---- Devin Monnens <dmonnens at gmail.com> wrote:

> >> You know, this is a really good question. As far as I can tell, each

> archive

> >> has their own. A citations standard and cataloguing standard would be

> >> something that I think the SIG could stand behind. Before that, I

> usually go

> >> by what other archives are using (such as Library of Congress).

> >>

> >> Of course, it also depends on the types of digital documents you have.

> Are

> >> you talking about games, pictures, text? Each of those would use its own

> >> standard.

> >>

> >> For games, I would suggest using TOSEC, as that is a standard adopted by

> the

> >> MAME people and seems pretty solid. Hopefully someone else here can give

> >> better advice.

> >>

> >> On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 7:20 AM, <ommail at cox.net> wrote:

> >>

> >> > Greetings all.

> >> >

> >> > I was wondering if the Preservation SIG had any standards for the

> >> > cataloging of digital files and related ephemera?

> >> > I have documented much of our holdings, but it is in a format that I

> simply

> >> > invented myself.

> >> >

> >> > Does the SIG currently have a unified standard used for the cataloging

> of

> >> > gaming artifacts?  Are they using a standard that I don't know about?

>  If

> >> > not, I think we most definitely could use one.

> >> > It's important to stress that it should cover physical items as well

> as

> >> > digital.

> >> >

> >> > Thoughts/information would be greatly appreciated.

> >> >

> >> > Joe Garrity

> >> > _______________________________________________

> >> > game_preservation mailing list

> >> > game_preservation at igda.org

> >> > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_preservation

> >> >

> >>

> >>

> >>

> >> --

> >> Devin Monnens

> >> www.deserthat.com

> >>

> >> The sleep of Reason produces monsters.

> >

> > _______________________________________________

> > game_preservation mailing list

> > game_preservation at igda.org

> > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_preservation

> >

> _______________________________________________

> game_preservation mailing list

> game_preservation at igda.org

> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_preservation

>




-- 
Devin Monnens
www.deserthat.com

The sleep of Reason produces monsters.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_preservation/attachments/20091222/ef503122/attachment.html>