#61
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Still on this topic of derivative works, we could discuss later when use the featured artists in commercial albums. I think we not reached a consensus after that discussion. I addition, there are a lot of arranged anime albums without the involvement of the original creators. For example, this and this, that I put on regular artists discography, since in most arranged game albums the composers aren't featured. I know many people disagree of this... Quote:
http://vgmdb.net/album/9996 http://vgmdb.net/album/8820 |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
I'm not sure if we need to detail a style of an arranged album and Vocaloids needs their own classifications.
It's interesting. I think these classifications work best when a single contains a full version of OP/ED themes while the OST has only the short version. If we have dedicated classifications for OP/ED themes, we need a "Featured Theme" as well, since they are sometimes released separately (like this). Quote:
Quote:
I might be a bit too passionate about more classifications, but at the same time I don't prefer to expand our classifications broadly. What I think the minimum additions required are Unused/Prototype, Remaster/Demaster, and one or two more for character songs, commercial and trailers, but I know it may already sound too many. |
#63
|
|||||
|
|||||
Quote:
Quote:
Synth Voice would cover more than just Vocaloids. I'm not sure if we need it either. Quote:
Quote:
No, because it's a compilation. Aside, do we need a Compilation classification? Quote:
|
#64
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Oh, and also: I think it would be cool, maybe users don't care to own "best of" albums, but the album titles might be descriptive of this anyway. Maybe not something we need. |
#65
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Edit: Maybe it should always be detailed in the notes in what way an album differs from in-game to get the Revamp classification. Last edited by Datschge; Jun 6, 2010 at 01:15 PM. |
#66
|
||||
|
||||
Okay, we'll change Remaster to Revamp.
All of our classifications so far are applicable to albums or tracks, but maybe we need some album-specific (or rather, disc-specific) ones. Namely: Vocal Album - for discs that are *mostly* vocal Compilation - Compilation of previously published material. As for the rest of the vocal classifications, what if we went with OP/ED/Theme Song - Openings, Endings, and Featured Themes Character/Image/Commercial Song - For character, commercial, and other miscellaneous vocals. All titles subject to change. We probably still need something for the odd vocal that pops up on an arrange album. As for the Licensed/Unlicensed stuff, I'm still unsure how to proceed with those, but I think that we could proceed with the Derived classification. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
(...perhaps we eventually classify an album as a whole by picking up only one or two of the most dominating classifications, and then additionally provide information on the percentage or ratio of how the individual tracks are classified) Quote:
|
#68
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
|
#69
|
||||
|
||||
This thread is quite long and i am a bit lazy to read it all..
What's the exact difference between arrangement & revamp ? I still think that using 1 classification for 1 track that is completely lost in the middle of an album is not a good idea. Because the classification should be used as a fast determination & general classification of the full album. OP / ED / Image themes is a good idea for singles, but should not be used on full length albums (until it's a full "image album"). I also don't like the compilation idea, because i am for less classifications.. and compilation alone does not indicate anything. Prototype/Unused/Omake are rare and is also misleading for a general idea of the album. While this Licensed/Unlicensed stuff is clearly too complicated. Licensed music (ex: Grand Theft Auto albums) are Original Soundtrack, it does not interest me much if it's licensed or not. Albums full of licensed music without any game related to should be classified as other. But i clearly got one question.. Do you guys want to use the classification as a "what is to be found on the album ?" or "what is this album about" ? Last edited by Myrkul; Jun 8, 2010 at 04:54 PM. |
#70
|
||||
|
||||
Well, it all depends how the user wants to use the search.
Does he want to want to find every Final Fantasy arrange album (a small subset), or every Final Fantasy arrange track that appears on any album. It sounds like we need 2 classifications. The album (or disc) level classification, where there can only be one; and the track level classification, which can be assembled into a list with multiple classifications. Ideally, the single album-level classification could be automatically determined from the track classifications, maybe based on the majority of the album, or on certain percentages. Unfortunately, we're nowhere near the point where we can do this. |
#71
|
||||
|
||||
I am at 200% for your last answer Secret.
I guess all of this could be done with the single track credits/classification feature we'r all waiting for. But i understand you guys are also trying to find a solution for now. Maybe a poll could be organized to know what visitors would really want to have. I also regretted the decision of anime integration without asking more people about it. |
#72
|
||||
|
||||
I talked some to Teioh about all this too. Maybe we do need to delay working more on this until we have track credit capability. In fact, the track stuff might be our highest priority now, since it's holding up so much (though product implementation is a close second).
|
#73
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
|
#74
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
It could be something simple like: Original Soundtrack (Vocal, Drama, Unused). |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Very yes. And yeah, the product system goes hand in hand with it, allowing for linking tracks to products.
|
#76
|
|||
|
|||
EDIT: Also, mixed (for albums where the tracks are mixed together) and partially mixed (for albums with some mixed tracks.) Last edited by Ira; Jun 13, 2010 at 11:31 AM. |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
Currently, "Prototype/Unused" is listed in the menu, but not in the guideline message, and instead there is another classification.
Quote:
|
#78
|
|||
|
|||
Not sure "Remix" is worth keeping anymore. It's a subset of "Arrangement" after all, and thus it's really hard to determine which an album falls under. Even if we don't merge them, I think "Remix" should always be selected with "Arrangement", so that someone searching by "Arrangement" will hit albums like this.
|
#79
|
||||
|
||||
That is a good point, though I'll have to try to remember why we originally created the Remix classificaiton.
|
#80
|
|||
|
|||
NNTK...NWTK
Last edited by emuxer; Nov 11, 2013 at 08:11 AM. |
#81
|
||||
|
||||
I understand that Joypad got copyright permission to sell arrangements of the music, and that's why the album is not listed as a doujin.
Also, the classification on the product page is sometimes done automatically upon linking when a set of conditions is met. However, the links can't always be auto-classified so the user may have to do it manually in those cases. |
#82
|
||||
|
||||
Even though they're properly paying mechanical licenses, they're still unofficial fan arrangements. I thought we were using the doujin classification so people can filter out fan arrangement albums, which is why we don't use it for doujin-published original soundtracks.
|
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Big Bang Mini OST This release was not commercial as it was free, it was self published by the developers, so it's doujin, but it was classified as commercial because it was an Original Soundtrack of a retail game. Arkedo Series #1 JUMP! This release was not commercial as it was free, it was self published by the developers, so it's doujin, and it was classified this way because it was an Original Soundtrack of an indie game, although it's a similar case as the one above. Aeon A free release by the same author of Arkedo Series #1 and published the same way, Original soundtrack of an unreleased game, and yet it's classified commercial. ZUNTATA RARE SELECTION Impromptu By definition, self-published (Taito by Taito), but classified as commercial because it's a big company. Video Games Techno Versions Presumed unlicensed remixes, classified as Commercial because it was published by a big music publisher in Italy. Joypad Records Most releases are Fan Arrangements, but all classified as commercial because they pay proper royalties and is a well-established publisher. Team Shanghai Alice All of its releases are original soundtracks and official, but since the publisher is the same person that makes the games and the music, all are classified as doujin. Currently, there is not a way to filter Fan Arrangements without doujin original and official soundtracks, and there's no way to filter arrangements without having results including both official and fan. I know there will be no changes as this debate has always been dismissed, but I wanted to share my point of view of the subject (again) and to give the usual revival of it of every 3 years. |
#84
|
||||
|
||||
We've been terribly inconsistent about what "Doujin/Indie" means for years, and it keeps getting worse with stuff like these Joypad albums. At this point, our uses of "commercial" and "doujin" are so far divorced from their actual meanings that we should stop using them.
If what we want is to capture is whether the publisher is a large commercial organization or a doujin group, we should do that (and we already do with label classifications). If what we want is to be able to filter out fan arrangement albums and original works by doujin artists, we should do that. If what we want is to classify which albums are properly licensed and which one's aren't, we should do that. As it stands, we're trying to capture no fewer than three different concepts in one field, and it's no wonder it keeps leading to arguments and confusion. This was the discussion thread about that field: https://vgmdb.net/forums/showthread.php?t=4358 |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Over all these years I simply got used to the idea that a search was not reliable so I learned to look for the arranger names and then after a few searches at VGMdb and outside I've been able to see if it's official or not. I always dismiss the Publisher Type field. It can mean anything. I guess this is just the usual triennial state of the confusion, if it's OK with the staff, then I guess it's OK, just my two cents. See you in 2016! (I DO mean it) Last edited by emuxer; Nov 10, 2013 at 10:35 PM. |
#86
|
||||
|
||||
I forgot about this post, but a recent edit made me read the whole subject again.
I never was agree to use classifications for a single track. Especially for this kind of album (which will make my example too): TENCHU 3 ORIGINAL SOUND TRACK There's a single remixed track at the bottom of disc 2, that's 1 track on 62. Like i said 3 years ago, i think the album should reflete the nature of the content. To me, this album is not a "remix" album. It's classified as an OST. Since we do not have track by track informations and search, we can only search by "global" classification of an album, so i think global information should be... "global". |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
It's my two cent, but I think the one to blame is not individual submitters who kindly add classification information based on a single track, but the failure of a transition to track-by-track based database, and the ultimate cause of it is because we've been leaving one or two hundred moderation chores per week over years to admins (and of course, I know who's taken care of scans and you're definitely the savior).
Anyways, I agree, at this moment, it may be better to keep only the overall classification of an album, but I can't prevent somebody from adding subclassifications with good will. |
#88
|
||||
|
||||
I sincerely don't see why this is some type of issue. Seriously.
As I said there, and I quote (myself): Quote:
Until this "track-by-track" database thingy you're working on is finished, this is the best way to properly classify the product's content.
__________________
|
#89
|
||||
|
||||
I think it's fine as it is now, additional classifications are a good thing, and are in sync with current guidelines in the first post of this thread. I don't know why additional classification is such a problem to some; if the album is OST but has just one remixed and one drama track (just an example), I will always select those classifications too and follow the guideline at the same time. Yes there was discussion about this and like I said in the Tenchu thread the discussion went nowhere but the current classification guidelines are there and should be respected. Biggest progress was seanne's suggestion in post no. 74 to have Main classification (additional classification) pattern aka Original Soundtrack (Remix, Drama) and it probably wouldn't require track by track classification. But nothing's been done about that for three years as far as I can see.
Just my two Euro cents |
#90
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I'm not sure we really want 3 fields (publisher type, publication type, rights type) for this. Although we like to be thorough, I'm not sure that it adds anything that the user wants. I am not sure the distinction between large publisher, independent publisher, and self-publishing is that significant anymore. I suppose one way to encapsulate its general use, would be to change it from "Doujin/Independent" to "Unlicensed Fan Arrange". |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Karaoke on classification field | depa | Miscellaneous Discussion | 2 | Jan 11, 2017 09:13 AM |
Submissions - Platform | Secret Squirrel | Submission Guideline Restructuring | 41 | Jun 27, 2013 02:07 PM |
new classification items | Phonograph | Questions and Comments | 0 | May 29, 2011 01:52 PM |
Rejected Submissions | mercenary09 | Questions and Comments | 4 | Apr 4, 2010 06:34 AM |
My Submissions (alpha) | Gigablah | Questions and Comments | 5 | Dec 7, 2009 02:28 PM |