Suggestion: State the version in the dat name even if there is only 1

[johnsanc]

I understand Hiccup's logic, but it only works for certain systems that follow a very predicable versioning system like Wii / Gamecube.

However, even that has caveats. For example there may be 1.01 without a 1.00 ever existing. I keep track of these as "Unconfirmed" in the Wii USA wiki: https://wiki.redump.info/index.php?title= … A_Missing. We have reason to believe there could be lower revisions, but we have no proof. Considering some of these are for very popular games, its quite possible that some of these 1.00 versions simply never made it to store shelves.

[Hiccup]

Another reason I want this is because for a long time I assumed that v1.01 was undumped, but in reality it was simply called New Super Mario Bros. Wii (Japan), rather than New Super Mario Bros. Wii (Japan) (v1.01). It was confusing, and others may also be confused by it, especially if they are used to No-Intro's naming and believe the Redump follows the No-Intro naming.

This isn't necessarily something that should apply to non-Nintendo discs, as they often don't (hardly ever?) start at "v1.00", whereas Nintendo discs usually do, and instances like New Super Mario Bros. Wii are an exception.

[F1ReB4LL]

However, even that has caveats. For example there may be 1.01 without a 1.00 ever existing.

Still, nothing bad in calling it (v1.01) to motivate people to look/check for (v1.00). Again, as far as I understand, No-Intro names their roms according to the version/revision, if known, even if the existence of the earlier ones is only suggested, not proven.

[Hiccup]

You are correct about No-Intro.

No-Intro mostly covers systems that use revisions, so most of the "versions" do start at "v1.00".

[ajshell1]

My position on this issue:
For most consoles: Meh, go ahead. Nintendo and Sony make sure version info is consistent. Don't do this for the GameWave though.

For PC: NO NO NO NO NO NO!

Version info is FAR too messy on PC for this to be in the filename. It doesn't belong there.


If you disagree, look at these and consider what the revised filename would be:
https://redump.info/disc/21147/
https://redump.info/disc/45369/
https://redump.info/disc/49850/

And I believe putting the version information for https://redump.info/disc/11223/ in the filename will break stuff since slashes aren't allowed on Windows files.  Yes, that game has two versions. Running sshock.exe gives a version of F1.6S, and running cdshock.exe gives a version of F1.6C.

Besides, I doubt Jackal will ever agree to this change.

[Jackal]

Didnt read all the posts, but when there's multiple versions released of a game, and one of them is undumped, the version can be added to the filename for the one that is dumped. Is that what you mean with New Super Mario Bros. Wii?

[F1ReB4LL]

Didnt read all the posts, but when there's multiple versions released of a game, and one of them is undumped, the version can be added to the filename for the one that is dumped. Is that what you mean with New Super Mario Bros. Wii?

When the only currently known release is internally marked as a revised version (so, an earlier one is highly likely to exist, just hasn't been found yet).

[Hiccup]

I was suggesting that for Nintendo discs, the revision is always displayed.
I don't have any experience with PC discs, so I won't comment on that.

[Egen]

I have never understood why having less of this type of information is good. People want to add a million-character-long string of characters like "En,Fr,Es,Jp,Ah,Uv,Il,Tx,Pv,Is" to a filename because it the game has some language choices, but a version number which is like four characters long we don't want to add. Why not? It's not like you can even search "Fr" in the filenames and only come up with games that include French because the string "Fr" is way too common... so we could argue that it's preeeeeeeetty useless to add those strings... but then for version numbers we ask "why would we do that."

But then I'm trying to figure out the logic of a project that goes back like 15 years which is kind of silly, no offense to anyone. It starts out one way and then people don't want to have to change x amount of years of naming conventions, and also opinions, etc. But I think leaving out the version numbers was always a huge mistake. I personally add them to every file I get when it makes it to my hard drive.


EDIT: Re-worded the first sentence and to explain it... a version number is identifying information about what you're playing, and to assume that something doesn't have a different version is very foolish. I came around and dumped a 1.10 of TimeSplitters 6 years after the 2.00 had been dumped, and to my knowledge it wasn't "obvious" or "known" that there was a 1.10; both are black label and plenty of games exist with versions higher than 1.xx without a 1.xx—THAT WE KNOW OF. That's the whole point. Then you just have to go back changing all the games that we find new versions for. It's a bit of a silly method and to... what, save like 5 characters off the filename?

[F1ReB4LL]

PS2 (as well as Sega systems) versions aren't tied to revisions, so you can't easily predict the missing ones. Like, https://redump.info/disc/39485/ is v1.04, but if to name it according to the version/revision, it should be v1.0/Rev 0 due to its ringcode that ends with "1". https://redump.info/disc/22458/ -- v2.01, ends with "1", so the earlier ones, like v2.00, don't exist _for this serial_ (which differs from the original release, which is https://redump.info/disc/15921/ which is v1.01, ringcodes end with 4 and 5, so it's worth to look for 1 or 2 with the possible v1.00 inside). TimeSplitters v2.00's ringcode ends with "4" and you can't say for sure, whether "1", "2" and "3" would differ or not until you find and dump all the missing rings.