Talk:ROM hack: Difference between revisions

Talk:ROM hack (view source)

Revision as of 23:48, 26 February 2017

7,673 bytes added , 26 February 2017

m

→‎Notable Hacks: Forgot the colon >_<

Kip

242

edits

@@ Line 216: / Line 216: @@
 ==PokéMon Arcoiris Version==
 Well i just recently bought a game called Pokémon Arcoris (still dont got it tho, its in mail) and im supprised its not here already. Its pretty cool and you can catch Shadow Lugia, it allows you to be Misty or Ash for characters and your starter is Pikachu. Its based on the orange islands, and is a hack of Emerald/Ruby/Sapphire. MUCH MORE INFO SOON WHEN I GOT IT.[[User:Rsrdaman]]
+:@[[User:Rsrdaman]]:Arco-Íris means rainbow in Portuguese.[[User:DigoBlaze12|DigoBlaze12]] ([[User talk:DigoBlaze12|talk]]) 20:47, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 ==Emerald 386 and FireRed Omega?==
@@ Line 434: / Line 435: @@
 While a section on legality may belong in the article, we will NOT present any form of rom patches, rom hacks, mods, etc, as legal. First because that's simply not true (gray area), second because Bulbapedia should not be a source of legal advice, particularly not legal advice that disagrees with Nintendo's interpretation of the law. --[[User:Evil Figment|Evil Figment]] ([[User talk:Evil Figment|talk]]) 05:43, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
+:Would rephrasing sentence(s) to be started with <code>it is believed that</code> (or some form of this) instead of making a decisive statement that this is legal? Also, is this related to Pokémon Prism being DMCA'd within the past 24 hours of this edit? --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 05:49, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
+::No. "It is believed" and most other similar formulation still carry a lot of implications about the actual situation. Short of extensive sources (and I mean legal-grade sources : case law, professional legal articles, etc), and even then I'm not sure we should, this is a position we have no business taking. --[[User:Evil Figment|Evil Figment]] ([[User talk:Evil Figment|talk]]) 06:19, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
+:::I'm no lawyer but I heard that ROM hacking is reverse engineering and reverse engineering is considered fair use. Don't quote me on this. This needs to be researched. Would that work if we had proper citations that legally support the stance of ROM hacking? --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 07:03, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
+::::Those are not the same thing. One means changing things and the other is just figuring things out. That's a big difference. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 07:07, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
+:::::Would the [[Wikipedia:Electronic Frontier Foundation|EFF]] be a good source if we could produce such sources that support the legal stance of anything ROM hacking? I really feel that flat-out deletion of the removed code by {{user|Evil Figment}} might have been a hasty decision based on something that is very recent. --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 07:17, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
+::::::You're welcome to look. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 07:20, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
+::::::As it happens, I am, in fact, a lawyer (and a vice-webmaster of Bulbagarden). I removed the text not to reflect recent events, but because legal gray area questions like that are complex and require a *lot* of work to get right. It's staying gone.--[[User:Evil Figment|Evil Figment]] ([[User talk:Evil Figment|talk]]) 07:26, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
+:::::::With that said, how should the article present the legality of ROM hacking as we currently understand it in this conversation? Not having any information is worse than it being there. Would it be better to say something along the lines of <code>it is unknown if this practice is legal or not</code>? --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 07:37, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
+::::::::I'd recommend to not put as much emphasis on the legality, and put more emphasis on the fact that Nintendo has taken action against it in the past. The fact that you might just, if you spend thousands (tens of) defending yourself, actually get a win is really not all that important.--[[User:Evil Figment|Evil Figment]] ([[User talk:Evil Figment|talk]]) 07:41, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
+:::::::::OK. That might be the best compromise to get word out about the legality of it, not explicitly, but at least implied that the legality is disputed amongst IP owners and fans of the IPs alike. Where would you recommend putting it in the article and how would you word it? --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 07:51, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
+::::::::::Where it used to be is good. --[[User:Evil Figment|Evil Figment]] ([[User talk:Evil Figment|talk]]) 07:53, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
+:::::::::::The agreed upon edit was made. Please correct anything that I got wrong. The {{template|fact}} is there because we need reliable source(s) for when they actually did this. --[[User:Wildgoosespeeder|Wildgoosespeeder]] ([[User talk:Wildgoosespeeder|talk]]) 08:10, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
+== Poke-rus translating Pokémon White 2 into Russian ==
+I think that this is notable because it is the first time as far as I know that a game is being translated into another language as a community effort and is being documented fairly well. They're releasing trailers on YouTube and so on, so I think it's pretty thoroughly done. If there are any more instances where a community has been translating a game into their language for over a year and has been releasing trailers showcasing their progress please do let me know. Also this article just includes language hacks as a section describing this kind of hack as mostly poorly done, so I thought that "oh this is a hack that seems to actualy be very good translated maybe I'll add it" and I did. I do can also agree if you think that we'll have to wait to see how good translated it is before adding it to the article. Because if it is bad it'll fall into the general description this article paints of language hacks. But on the other hand if it's good I actualy think it needs to be included. --[[User:Raltseye|<span style="color:#FF6464">R</span><span style="color:#11BB11">alts</span><span style="color:#6464FF">eye</span>]] [[User talk:Raltseye|prata med mej]] 23:29, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
+:Well, the Pokémon games were fan translated from Japanese to English in the DS era.--[[User:PannenkoekenNL|PannenkoekenNL]] ([[User talk:PannenkoekenNL|talk]]) 06:01, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
+==Notable Hacks==
+There are 3 notable hacks that I think that should be here: Pokémon Sienna, Pokémon Light Platinum and Pokémon Clover:
+Pokémon Sienna is notable for including a dex composed by fan-made and official Pokémon, and it was being developed for over 6 years.
+Light Platinum is notable for recreating a Pokémon Gen IV style using a Gen III engine, as well as having a full Gen IV Pokédex and a new story behind [[Palkia]], [[Dialga]], [[Giratina]] and [[Arceus]]. It' s also has some characters from the Anime.
+Clover is a hack of Pkmn Fire Red. It still uses the Kanto region, but replaces the current Pokémon with fan-made Pokémon, often with grotesque, obscene and humorous characteristics, having the famous Tentaquil meme among them. The ROM Hack' s Team is also creating a fan-game, based on it called DubsClover or NiClover.
+Am I allowed to put them?'''-[[User:DigoBlaze12|DigoBlaze12]] ([[User talk:DigoBlaze12|talk]]) 20:52, 29 January 2017 (UTC)'''
+:I think they may need some further justification.  The proposed guidelines were:
+* It is of cultural or historical significance.
+* It is relatively well know.
+* It demonstrates a notable feature or features that is represented in the large number of hacks that followed.
+* It is a significant step forward in terms of hack development as a whole.
+:I think only if you can reasonably show that these proposed hacks fit most of these categories you can include them.  It could be argued, for example, that Light Platinum could fit point 1 or 2 (you would have to justify this of course).  I also feel it necessary to point out that these are notable hacks, not famous hacks.  They key difference being this is designed to be an information article giving examples of the range of hacks, how hacking evolved over its history, how sophisticated it is and give an insight into its culture and development process, rather than being a hack hall of fame.  --[[User:Kip|<span style="color:#f29c6b">'''K'''</span><span style ="color:#5fc2d9">'''i'''</span><span style="color:#f29c6b">'''p'''</span>]] | [[User_talk:Kip|Talk]] 23:48, 26 February 2017 (UTC)