2 Replies to “Platform Mapping”

  1. The model that Oregami uses is an attempt to be more specific about certain revisions of platforms, OSs, and so on. You can see their data model in the post “Sorting out the platform mess” on their website. Larger groups split into larger branching trees which is more than a typical user needs to see on the front end but is useful for specification.

    A lot of platform specifications on places like Mobygames are wrong due to issues of inherited datasets with no clear origin. I’ve run across computer games that say they are on every platform yet little evidence exists that they were even released at all. Archive is fixing that with the existence of game versions and attempts to find specific mentions of games in contemporaneous magazine coverage. I believe that notification of a hardware platform – and many other details in a database quite frankly – should require some sort of source for verification. The additional benefit of this would be that if a database doesn’t implement an Oregami-level backend a person looking into the game could have the ability to deduce what versions of a platform/OS could support it. My belief on databases are as equal parts useful consume tool and research assistant.

  2. Thank you for your feedback! The origami blog post describes the problems with platforms really well, thank you for that hint.
    We build our mapping to merge and/or deduplicate information from different video game data sources to analyze it. So, the first step was to normalize, standardize and unify the different terms for platforms in each database. While it’s not our aim to build a new game database we are more interested in linking and analyzing them. Although we would love to see a more specific (and maybe verified) platform specification in video game databases we need to handle what is out there – therefore we agree with you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *