[DONE] What should I call these editions?

[F1ReB4LL]

So I should use:

Slam Tilt (Expert Software)
SimCity 2000: Special Edition (Original)

Why not SimCity 2000 (Special Edition)? I.e. "Special Edition" in "Edition" field? I don't think this game has "Special Edition" on the title screen...

[Jackal]

So I should use:

Slam Tilt (Expert Software)
SimCity 2000: Special Edition (Original)

Why not SimCity 2000 (Special Edition)? I.e. "Special Edition" in "Edition" field? I don't think this game has "Special Edition" on the title screen...

There's not a single 'Special Edition' between brackets in any dat, so it's better if you first check such things before posting useless suggestions again

[F1ReB4LL]

Same for (Original), I wasn't talking about the filenames.

And don't forget, that we have a totally different database with its own fields. What's looking good in No-Intro's dats is screwing our database and vice-versa. Also, I don't remember any special/limited/whatever editions on the carts, so the convention should be at least modified.

[BitLooter]

I took a closer look at SC2k and found many files, including the PDF manual, dated around early 1998. The game's special edition was released (as best as I can tell) late 1995-early 1996. Therefore, I believe this disc to be different from the original boxed version, earning its own release designation. So now I'm thinking it should be labeled:

SimCity 2000: Special Edition (Jewel Case) or
SimCity 2000 (Special Edition Jewel Case)

Or is there a better word for "Jewel Case" I should use instead?

[iR0b0t]

just add the game, we will find a solution

[BitLooter]

Will do. This thread was helpful in me making up my mind how I would do it, at any rate. I'll just use my best judgment and hope for the best.

[F1ReB4LL]

I took a closer look at SC2k and found many files, including the PDF manual, dated around early 1998. The game's special edition was released (as best as I can tell) late 1995-early 1996. Therefore, I believe this disc to be different from the original boxed version, earning its own release designation. So now I'm thinking it should be labeled:

SimCity 2000: Special Edition (Jewel Case) or
SimCity 2000 (Special Edition Jewel Case)

Or is there a better word for "Jewel Case" I should use instead?

Title: SimCity 2000
Edition: Special Edition - Jewel Case

[themabus]

it could be:
SimCity 2000 (Special Edition) (Jewel Case)
with 'Jewel Case' in Additional
with both those flags being managed automatically for .dat output,
i.e. becoming visible or invisible depending on presence and state of other records
(e.g. in case ther's other 'SimCity 2000', (Special Edition) would become visible,
in case ther's other (Special Edition), also (Jewel Case) would be shown)
would there be no-intro implemented with addition of separate 'edition' field
also this record would resolve the same way
and those would too:
https://redump.info/disc/4501/
https://redump.info/disc/4496/
https://redump.info/disc/4504/
https://redump.info/disc/4498/
https://redump.info/disc/4499/
this is one of those things i wanted to talk about, once Dremora is back

[BitLooter]

I've just submitted them to the database. I decided to go with Special Edition - Jewel Case as F1ReB4LL suggested, although I kind of like (Special Edition) (Jewel Case). I don't really like the idea of this sort of information being dependent on other discs in the database, though. I can see it causing all kind of confusion - for example, I could rip my disc and by those standards it would be named SimCity 2000. But then someone else could come along and add the original version of the game to the database, and then it would be named SimCity 2000, while mine gets renamed SimCity 2000 (Special Edition). Clearly there's a difference between the discs, or else mine wouldn't get renamed; why shouldn't the name reflect the contents of the disc fully to begin with? IMO, that's just shortsighted and poor planning.

[themabus]

yes i completely agree with you, BitLooter, but, as i understand it, most of the staff don't want it that way
because it's too long, or too TOSEC, or something
in no-intro flags are shown to break appart records, at least that's how i understand it, so it could be compromise