Randalf

Jason Carr said DonkeyKongsVet said I am getting an unexpected error encountered box, won't load the interface after getting latest beta, this time I am on the 64 bit Windows 10 system (the 32 bit system is on a leave of absence) Hmm, I'm guessing maybe it could be the new XInput. Maybe it's DirectX? Try downloading and running this: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=8109 That did the trick Thanks!

I am getting an unexpected error encountered box, won't load the interface after getting latest beta, this time I am on the 64 bit Windows 10 system (the 32 bit system is on a leave of absence)

2 barrels up for the asterisk idea. I am all for preserving history too, my thoughts were just what they call it today, I know there is going to be published boxes with those K+A ratings too. I forgot about CERO though, all these systems should get together and be 1 system, but I am sure that won't happen!

Good points, and those are things I thought of as well thinking this through my head. If that is what happens, then it happens, I don't see it being an inconvenience for sure. I been using what was listed, I used them as examples in the guidelines I offered to have written up. Only once I went to a social media site to get a tie breaker on a rating request. That site was of course, a verified page of the publisher of the game as some of the other better-known sites had no rating for it. Normally I don't like social media sites for some things.

The resources when those guidelines come up anyways. I would believe we are right now using common sense and some of the examples mentioned yesterday for sites to use avoiding things such as guesses in our head, some random person making a website donkeykongisawsome.com and put on there it is a first person shooter game

DOS76 said Would it be feasible to have people who are submitting their changes link the mods to citations of the proposed changes. I thought of that a few times yesterday, but the only question I had for myself was, are we going to call the link someone provides a credible source? We are verifying with our own resources (or what may come about from the guidelines anyways)

My opinion we should just use ESRB, I am trying not to single out anyone that may be outside of the US, but it is going to be one of those things, ESRB is older than PEGI. If you live and play a game in a European country, you see games marketed with a rating by the PEGI, likewise with ESRB in the US and likewise with another country on another system, etc. But it is ratings, so I don't imagine there would be too much of a fuss about it. Many of the resources we are using (Wikipedia, etc) anything that had to do with ratings, is ESRB anyways from what I have seen so far. If we stick with one system I believe ESRB is the way to go, most of us seem to know who they are anyways and helps keep things simple. (Unless we happen to find a game that was only released in Europe and was rated by the PEGI with that title, that might cause another conversation) That's my thought anyway.

PEGI: Pan European Game Information Basically, Europe's version of rating games, because you know, nobody could just stick with one system globally. Replaced aging rating systems, used in several countries today.

Oh and my thought on the PEGI, we should recognize it if they rated it of course, but I know we probably don't want to clog the database too much and make things confusing. PEGI and ESRB ratings seems to be an opinion, we could survey 40 people and we will hear PEGI is better, ESRB is better, and they are both terrible and we shouldn't pay attention to either.

I am actually glad this has come up, I been jotting down some guidelines and was working through some tidbits on ratings. My thought, if the game has a rating today, even if it was retroactive and had no rating when it was originally released, I feel we should have it in the database with that rating from the ESRB. Anything K+A I am going with E, only because the ESRB's site states that rating was changed to E, and in the list of all ratings today they post, K+A is not mentioned. I interpret that as K+A is old, no longer recognized When it comes to ratings, I been trying to keep it simple, I had one game yesterday (can not recall which one now) for some reason I could not find it on the ESRB site (could have been the search words) but, on the developer's Twitter page, (and it was a verified page) it listed the game with a rating, so I made the choice to approve it as I couldn't imagine a verified page would advertise they have a rating from the ESRB, (and I didn't even find a news article someplace stating the rating changed, etc) but I also found that the ESRB site seems to be bad with searching depending on the length of the title.

Sounds like I haven't run into this game you mention. Kids and Adults became E for everyone, I would say because the industry today recognizes it as E today, we should call it E today. That's my 2 barrels. I feel like I been a stick in the mud on some of these....quality is king afterall :)

SentaiBrad said DonkeyKongsVet said How far in depth do we need to go with guidelines? Do we want to list out titles and formats? etc? I can put the hammer down, smash some barrels, and certainly add in anything already discussed It doesn't need to detail every aspect, hopefully some stuff is common sense. Jason and I are wanting to trust our Moderator's, that said we do need things detailed a bit. The internet doesn't necessarily have standards, but we need them for Quality's sake. First and foremost, Quality is king. When researching something if two sites have conflicting metadata, try and find a 3rd and see what the 3rd one will match. Good and acceptable websites to double check metadata are MobyGames, GiantBomb, Wikipedia and GameFAQ's. When possible get the best looking image available. Preferably no Watermarks, but if one can't be found in the interim then Watermarks is fine until or unless we can find a replacement. (image submission and moderating isn't available yet) We talked about names, try to replicate what the Box dictates to the best of your keyboards ability. Characters like :, - and & are acceptable. Characters like _, + etc are not acceptable UNLESS on the Boxart or the Developer has spelt the game with them. Box names are what we go by for ease of use, but Developer spelling takes precedent as long as they haven't changed it. I'll probably have more, along with the other user. Any new feature requests for the Database can you guys make BitBucket tickets for us? They'll easier to keep track of then the forum post we've already got going. Make sure you put "LaunchBox Games Database:" In the title and mark them Major for us. Got it, makes sense. I will make a draft to send over, probably not going to have anything until tomorrow. I had some ideas, and what you just said was pretty much my thought process.

This is what happens when I type at 11pm. Keeping a barrel throwing animal in check on a daily basis takes a toll on me somedays. That reminds me...bananas, must buy bananas or the visit will not go over well

How far in depth do we need to go with guidelines? Do we want to list out titles and formats? etc? I can put the hammer down, smash some barrels, and certainly add in anything already discussed

I know Jason mentioned about needing written rules and guidelines for data, and it didn't look like anyone offered to tackle it yet and if that is the case, I am willing to tackle it because that same game shows up for me, and I been questioning the title with it to myself as I reference it. Same with the Batman example, it's a colon added, but some sources that should be credible had it, some did not. I am willing to tackle drawing up some guidelines with some input and we can draft some ideas on something consistent for all of us to use.

Never thought of it, just tried it, got the same result, I would expect for the text to be off screen a bottom scroll bar for scrolling left and right would appear but I do not get that in any size I try.

There is a game I can not accept or reject, the wikipedia URL is rather long and I have no option in Chrome or Edge to get to the accept/reject option. The option is "off screen"

Jason Carr said Woot! So I trust this means we finally fixed the issue with 32-bit? :) Shhhhh....that computer has big ears, but yes, the 32 bit issue is fixed :)

Round of applause to you Jason, I am back in business too!

I just went to the Win 10 64 bit system, installed newest update, no auto launch, nothing on manual launch, I monitored task amnager here too when I launched it and saw nothing appear (unless it was very quick)

Drybonz said Probably something on my end, but the 2nd beta version today, the one just uploaded, will not launch. Usually, it re-launches after updating but did not. Also, my normal icon to launch LB is not working. Don't think so, it didn't relaunch, I can't get it to launch manually, I checked task manager, not even showing it pop in when I launch it

I am not sure if I could have done anything wrong, but I did for giggles and barrels, change the xml to windows media player and yielded the same results.

I will give that a try, I do know the One Drive version that has the xml version gives the same behavior on the 32 bit OS, but is smooth on the 64.

I can send anything if that will help. I read some of the windows event logs, but my skill at reading those some days are a little rusty.

It failed on me still, got the same exact issue, I am taking a look around because when I mentioned that there was nothing about VLC in my xml file on my system, I figured that was a flag, the one drive has reference to VLC in the xml file, but I get the same problem still even if I launch it from one drive. I am taking a spin around some logs on the system to see if something gets my attention that could be playing a part in this. I checked the XML file on the C and D drives, the D drive has Beta 10, C drive has Beta 9 both have no indication about VLC in the xml file, only my one drive copy does, but that still quits if I launch from the 32 bit but not the 64