 |
Progress Continues
We've already had 21582 updates since Dolphin 5.0. Keep up with Dolphin's continuing progress through the Dolphin Blog: February, March, and April 2024 Dolphin Progress Report. |
 |
The Dolphin Emulator Wiki needs your help! Dolphin can play thousands of games, and changes are happening all the time. Help us keep up! Join in and help us make this the best resource for Dolphin. |
Project:General Discussions/Archive: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→2014) |
(→2013) |
||
| Line 478: | Line 478: | ||
::::The list table is rendered through MediaWiki markup, I'm unsure if we can mess CSS sprites with MediaWiki formatting without major issues. However, if this can be done without loading issues, the main list is the best way for having the banner images (better than in infobox VG) - [[User:Jhonn|Jhonn]] ([[User talk:Jhonn|talk]]) | ::::The list table is rendered through MediaWiki markup, I'm unsure if we can mess CSS sprites with MediaWiki formatting without major issues. However, if this can be done without loading issues, the main list is the best way for having the banner images (better than in infobox VG) - [[User:Jhonn|Jhonn]] ([[User talk:Jhonn|talk]]) | ||
:This is a good point... Dialup user here so, a giant image would SUCK for me. Lots of smaller images are easier to cache. But a thousand banners on the wii page would suck no matter what for me. - [[User:MaJoR|MaJoR]] ([[User talk:MaJoR|talk]]) 04:50, 7 February 2013 (CET) | :This is a good point... Dialup user here so, a giant image would SUCK for me. Lots of smaller images are easier to cache. But a thousand banners on the wii page would suck no matter what for me. - [[User:MaJoR|MaJoR]] ([[User talk:MaJoR|talk]]) 04:50, 7 February 2013 (CET) | ||
=== Influx of Bot Generated Accounts === | |||
I think we had discussed previously the accounts that seem to be generated by bots of some sort. The number of accounts registered is starting to get a bit ridiculous, even if there are no follow-up spam posts. Is the captcha/other constraints used configurable enough that they could be modified to stem the flow a bit? [[User:Kolano|Kolano]] ([[User talk:Kolano|talk]]) 17:39, 8 March 2014 (CET) | |||
It is configurable, but what do we do? It appears as though they have figured out our captcha trick for account creation but then get hit on the post captcha, so we just get tons of random accounts. But we don't even have access to IP addresses to find similarities for banning :(. Do you have any ideas? - [[User:MaJoR|MaJoR]] ([[User talk:MaJoR|talk]]) 09:52, 9 March 2014 (CET) | |||
I'd have a feeling that things aren't targeting this wiki specifically. Adding some additional custom query, even if it didn't change with each registration, in addition to the standard one provided by the captcha tool might cut things down. [[User:Kolano|Kolano]] ([[User talk:Kolano|talk]]) 17:18, 9 March 2014 (CET) | |||
Agreed. But I still need something more specific... Are you talking about a second captcha just for signing on? Or just a new custom query for our existing captcha system? - [[User:MaJoR|MaJoR]] ([[User talk:MaJoR|talk]]) 23:00, 9 March 2014 (CET) | |||
Wouldn't a simple solution do it? E.g. adding the "you need to type in the name of the emulator here" bit that we use for editing articles to the registration, and/or adding another captcha? That wouldn't be too complicated to implement, and is a good first attempt: if it doesn't succeed, ok, we'll have to look into some more "advanced" options, if it does, yay, simple solution to the problem. [[User:Incassum|incassum]] ([[User talk:Incassum|talk]]) 19:54, 10 March 2014 (CET) | |||
"you need to type in the name of the emulator here" is already in the registration process. - [[User:MaJoR|MaJoR]] ([[User talk:MaJoR|talk]]) 03:38, 11 March 2014 (CET) | |||
What about using more questions (randomly selecting one of them each time) or using a captcha method based on mouse input only, like these simple jigsaw puzzle based? Right now I remember of KeyCaptcha, but AFAIK it isn't free... [[User:Jhonn|Jhonn]] ([[User talk:Jhonn|talk]]) | |||
=== Category Format Clean-up === | |||
Categories have been put together in a fairly ad-hoc way. That has resulted in a few issues... | |||
*Overlaps in categories for different usage: Arcade platform vs Arcade genre | |||
*Different capitalization styles (All initial caps vs just first initial cap) | |||
*General sloppiness across category naming | |||
I think I'd like to clean such up, standardizing to something like "<Category Grouping>:<Category Identifier>" so we'd have categories like "Platform: Arcade", "Genre: Arcade", "Publisher: Nintendo", "Input Supported: Wii Remote", "Initial Release Year: 2011". A lot of such can be performed with changes to Infobox, but some things like the platform/image categories would require many edits. I'd probably want some automated assistance with that. Feedback would be appreciated.[[User:Kolano|Kolano]] ([[User talk:Kolano|talk]]) 08:28, 5 September 2013 (CEST) | |||
:I agree with this. Just the result of lots of manual editing over time. I trust you'll handle it well. If I see anything I don't like I'll whine. When you email delroth the instructions give us a headsup here please. - [[User:MaJoR|MaJoR]] ([[User talk:MaJoR|talk]]) 12:28, 6 September 2013 (CEST) | |||
::OK, initial change associated with this has been enacted. Will take a while for the initial template changes to percolate through the wiki. Should cover most of the categories outside of platforms, and any other direct in-page ones. Will likely start on the red-link elimination tomorrow (i.e. the 17th), not sure if there is any automation that could help with such. A few related issues: | |||
::* One issue with the revised category names, is that although things still sort alphabetically. Since all categories in a group are prefixed with the same term, they no longer group together by letter. I think I may revise things to use a postfix instead to address that. Such will make the global categories listing messier (since groups won't group together), but would improve the display of individual category pages. Please let me know your thoughts. | |||
::* When we transition the Platform categories, do we just want to move toward listing the platforms in the infobox, rather than as a separate item? [[User:Kolano|Kolano]] ([[User talk:Kolano|talk]]) 09:00, 17 September 2013 (CEST) | |||
:::Fine with me. I don't know anything regarding the revised category names grouping though, sorry. - [[User:MaJoR|MaJoR]] ([[User talk:MaJoR|talk]]) 04:58, 18 September 2013 (CEST) | |||
This is almost complete now. Unfortunately I failed to add categories to the newly created categories, so I need to do one more pass to add appropriate ones in. [[User:Kolano|Kolano]] ([[User talk:Kolano|talk]]) 04:50, 17 October 2013 (CEST) | |||
OK, this should be done now, outside of the platform migration to the infoboxes. [[User:Kolano|Kolano]] ([[User talk:Kolano|talk]]) 07:20, 17 October 2013 (CEST) | |||
=== Infobox Enlinkening === | |||
OK, I think I'm about done with my edits to how infobox generated categories are handled and the addition of linkages to those generated categories. Sorry for the recent spew of edits related to such without much discussion. Please do let me know your thoughts. [[User:Kolano|Kolano]] ([[User talk:Kolano|talk]]) 06:11, 5 September 2013 (CEST) | |||
:Looks good to me. I don't know about the internals of how it works, but I don't care about that :P. From an end user standpoint it looks and works great. That's what counts. - [[User:MaJoR|MaJoR]] ([[User talk:MaJoR|talk]]) 12:28, 6 September 2013 (CEST) | |||
=== Perfect Compatibility? === | |||
I'd like you to take a look at the SSB:M compatibility page. This game is rated 5 stars as "Perfect: No issues at all!". Yet, there seems to be one or two minor, ''minor'' errors listed on the page. | |||
So what is the specific criteria for a perfect rating? Would no known bugs, period, be too out of the question? Or is "perfect" emulation accuracy unreasonable anyhow, considering it isn't cycle for cycle accurate and won't be anytime soon. Basically, can we define the word perfect? | |||
[[User:MirandaStreeter|Miranda]] ([[User talk:MirandaStreeter|talk]]) 01:16, 24 October 2013 (CEST) | |||
Perfect should mean there are no known issues/defects with the reproduction. It's unclear why Melee wasn't knocked back to 4 stars earlier, since it clearly has open issues. As you note it doesn't necessarily mean there is an exact 1:1 reproduction, as we're dealing with high-level emulation in many places. There should not be noticeable image defects/gameplay issues though. So for instance, even if a character starts to talk a tenth of second too late in some title; it could still be rated perfect, if that doesn't effect gameplay and would generally be unnoticeable without a stopwatch. [[User:Kolano|Kolano]] ([[User talk:Kolano|talk]]) 04:13, 24 October 2013 (CEST) | |||
:SSBM isn't the only offender. A number of games seem to be 5-star happy yet have known issues listed without fixes. These include: | |||
::* Aggressive Inline | |||
::* Harvest Moon: Magical Melody | |||
::* Ikaruga | |||
::* Sonic Adventure DX: Director's Cut | |||
::* Tales of Symphonia | |||
:Yet more are listed at 5 stars without any version compatibility reports or test. None at all. These include: | |||
::* Donkey Konga | |||
::* Dora the Explorer: Journey to the Purple Planet | |||
::* Hitman 2: Silent Assassin | |||
::* Hudson Selection Vol. 3: Bonk's Adventure | |||
::* Mr Driller: Drill Land | |||
::* Pac-Man World Rally | |||
:You'll also find some 5-star games that require DX9 backends as a fix, despite it being entirely dropped in latest revisions. These include: | |||
::* Hot Wheels World Race | |||
::* Sega Soccer Slam | |||
:While all of those are obvious fixes, others aren't so much. Many of the rest either have conflicts between the reporting graph and actual report entries, list 4 stars in the graph while reading 5 stars in the official list, are listing compatibility results without any details, or haven't had a test entry since v3.0 and previous. These would have to be looked into on a case by case basis. I'd also check and see if a specific user/IP is marking 5 stars prematurely, or if it's a collective problem. --[[User:MirandaStreeter|Miranda]] ([[User talk:MirandaStreeter|talk]]) 21:10, 30 October 2013 (CET) | |||
----- | |||
Whoa now. This is exactly the problem. ALL GAMES HAVE SOMETHING WRONG WITH THEM. A tiny lighting bug. Tev derp. SOMETHING. By the criteria of "no known problems" there should be no five star titles. And even if we keep the ones that have no known bugs, it is just a matter of time until someone grabs one of those tiny global problems and there we go. The "perfect" rating concept is inherently flawed. | |||
As was discussed in the rating changes below, it is the opinion of the devs (minus skidau) that 5 stars ''should not mean absolute perfection''. 5 stars is something we should use, and since the emulator isn't perfect then nothing would be five stars. The criteria that was discussed is below in the Rating Changes section. That criteria is "almost perfect". Very very very good, with allowances for very minor bugs. Melee is a perfect example. Everything is perfect, except for some very very tiny bugs that no one bug someone who goes back and forth from console and dolphin a lot would notice (JMC47 and the netplay people in this case). Under the "almost perfect" criteria Melee is five stars. | |||
We need to work this out. We've been putting off this rating thing forever, and now that demotions are starting to happen based on the old ratings, it's time to get this settled. Until this rating issue is settled please do not demote any more 5 star games. Kolano, if you revert 5 star pages I won't get into an edit war with you, you pretty much handle all the boring tasks like this and I respect that. But anyone else? I'm reverting all five star demotions until the ratings issue is settled permanently. | |||
For the record, I promoted Melee to five stars based on encouragement from the devs that it qualified for "perfect" status regardless of the little bugs (again, skidau objecting :P). - [[User:MaJoR|MaJoR]] ([[User talk:MaJoR|talk]]) 22:27, 30 October 2013 (CET) | |||
==2014== | ==2014== | ||