AKuHAK

Though I'm not opposed to the point where I can be bothered to revert the edits, I don't think listing the GoodXXXX names of ROMs used in compilations is worthwhile. Those ROM lists are old and misinformed - names and regions are frequently wrong and some dumps are missing entirely. I suppose the fact they can't spell "Millennium" might be a clue that they're not very reliable.

This stuff is worth mentioning if the ROMs in question are "odd" in some way (e.g. a prototype or less common revision or something), but lists of names that ROMs were given a decade ago probably isn't all that useful. Same applies for No-intro or TOSEC or whatever. -Black Squirrel (talk) 13:46, 8 July 2013 (CDT)

What exactly do you mind? I ripped off all roms from the disk, extracted it, scanned with GoodTools which is updated recently (in 2012 December goodgen 3.21). Finally I got that some of the roms isn't mentioned in database. To my mind it is very useful information - we can found some missing roms, we can discover that some roms was changed for some reasons, we can see that these compilations uses some early beta prototypes. But those games that are listed - technically they are verified and dumped from REAL hardware. It especially if they marked as [!] (verified) roms. So to my mind people have to know that they play EXACTLY that version of the game, which is discovered by me. As for those phantasy star millenium dump - yeeees it is missing, There is some games that are missing and it is normal. In fact it is very difficult to find such a game that isnt included int goodtools.

It's useful, but not in the GoodTools format. Their naming scheme is flawed and misleading - the sort of thing wikis try to avoid, and the system itself is incomplete. People will also favour things like No-intro for political reasons - it could get messy if we start listing every ROM in two formats, and No-intro has the same problems.

The situation is awkward. One of the solutions Sega Retro had at one point was a ROM categorisation system (I think it used SHA-1 hashes). I'm not really an expert in this field but comparing ROMs to misleading lists of yesteryear doesn't strike me as the best of plans (though I concede, there might not be a nicer solution at present). Food for thought. -Black Squirrel (talk) 13:50, 9 July 2013 (CDT)