Error Listings and Rejected Edits 2025

[dhaabi]

What is this supposed to be?
https://vgcollect.com/item/36547

Apparently, Activision saw no issue with publishing two different games with the same name for the same system. This eBay listing should clarify what 36547 is. I've updated some of the information for it and 1620.

Here are the GameFAQs pages for the two separate games too.
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/ps2/563123-cabelas-big-game-hunter/data
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/ps2/943429-cabelas-big-game-hunter/data

[price5474]

Slow internet day it would seem ended up with two blanks when I submitted a new item.

https://vgcollect.com/item/284960
https://vgcollect.com/item/284959

[coffeejits]

the following titles in the Colecovision [NA] subcategory have their instruction manuals as the front image art:

https://www.vgcollect.com/item/242843
https://www.vgcollect.com/item/242871
https://www.vgcollect.com/item/243189
https://www.vgcollect.com/item/243191
https://www.vgcollect.com/item/243195

The correct box art can be found here:  http://www.colecovision.eu/ColecoVision/games/

Which brings me to my next question.  Since each of these titles were developed in Europe by Philip Klaus Krause should they be moved to the Colecovision [EU] subcategory?  I'm torn because each title contains both the NTSC and PAL versions, and Good Deal Games lists these titles under their publishing link here:  https://www.gooddealgames.com/Publishing.html  The other option is to list the titles in both the [NA] and [EU] categories, but I'd like an opinion from the mods before doing any unnecessary duplication.

If these titles should be moved, then there are a few other titles that should be moved as well:

https://www.vgcollect.com/item/284250
https://www.vgcollect.com/item/242876
https://www.vgcollect.com/item/243029
https://www.vgcollect.com/item/182871
https://www.vgcollect.com/item/243188

[dhaabi]

the following titles in the Colecovision [NA] subcategory have their instruction manuals as the front image art:

Which brings me to my next question.  Since each of these titles were developed in Europe by Philip Klaus Krause should they be moved to the Colecovision [EU] subcategory?  I'm torn because each title contains both the NTSC and PAL versions, and Good Deal Games lists these titles under their publishing link here:  https://www.gooddealgames.com/Publishing.html  The other option is to list the titles in both the [NA] and [EU] categories, but I'd like an opinion from the mods before doing any unnecessary duplication.

I've removed entry art for the listed entries with incorrect front art.

Do you mean that two separate cartridges for different regions are bundled and sold together and then distributed in one package? Or do you mean that data for both versions exists on one cartridge? Regardless, category placement for online-exclusive items should be determined from where the item was sold. For online releases, this usually means where the publisher conducts business from. Unless I'm mistaken, Good Deal Games is based out of the United States. So if that's the case, then I believe all of the items you've presented are categorized correctly in the NA section. This sort of circumstance is outlined in the style guide, shown below:

Online Exclusive Releases
Physical games that are released outside of the normal retail channel and instead are sold exclusively through websites can be put in various categories. This is one of the most difficult type of item to track because the products are typically not region limited and are made available worldwide. In general, a game of this type should be put into the appropriate regional category that relates to the website that has exclusive distribution rights, or if it has a wider online release, then the developer and/or publisher's home country.

[coffeejits]

Actually, I meant that the data for both NTSC and PAL versions are on the same cartridge.  No matter, I'll update the items in question.  Also, some of these titles are in the [EU] category, so I'll submit edits to move them to the [NA].   Thanks for the clarification.

[Agozer]

I added https://vgcollect.com/item/285491 under Nintendo Switch [JP] by mistake, when it should have been under Nintendo Switch [CN]. Can someone make the switch, please?

[price5474]

blank
https://vgcollect.com/item/285642
https://vgcollect.com/item/285644

[bizzgeburt]

My description text to the following item was rejected:
https://vgcollect.com/item/207992

with the following statement:
Is there a variant for this item which features 83051.206.GM/2? My original submitted information is also correct. https://www.ebay.de/itm/165230382017

To answer this question:
Yes, there is. I own it. The box back clearly reads 83051.206.GM/2, and another difference I saw was, that the cover submitted shows a big USK sticker on top of another smaller one on the cover itself ... MY version has the big label directly printed on...

So yea, I'd suggest those are 2 different versions of this Software-Pyramide Premium Edition version of the game ...

If I was to submit my version, what nomenclature shall I use? 
Should they be differentiated by box back number?

[dhaabi]

https://vgcollect.com/item/207992.

If I was to submit my version, what nomenclature shall I use? 
Should they be differentiated by box back number?

I noticed a proper /2 variant shortly after I rejected your edit. If you were to submit the variant, the most ideal name would be Lego Star Wars: Die Komplete Saga - Premium Edition (83051.206.GM/2). Then, we can update 207992 using the same format.

[bizzgeburt]

https://vgcollect.com/item/207992.

If I was to submit my version, what nomenclature shall I use? 
Should they be differentiated by box back number?

I noticed a proper /2 variant shortly after I rejected your edit. If you were to submit the variant, the most ideal name would be Lego Star Wars: Die Komplete Saga - Premium Edition (83051.206.GM/2). Then, we can update 207992 using the same format.

Done  shortly after that I submitted Pictures. There you can see the diffrences I mentioned.

[theodw]

https://vgcollect.com/item/260831

Developer rejected.

Based on that, should all other entries of the games be edited?

PS5 NA: https://vgcollect.com/item/255138
PS5 EU: https://vgcollect.com/item/245265
PS4 EU: https://vgcollect.com/item/246415
NSW NA: https://vgcollect.com/item/260177
NSW EU: https://vgcollect.com/item/245691
NSW AU: https://vgcollect.com/item/274197


And yes, we've had this argument with Ubi time and again. It's especially noticeable because the "Developed and Published by Ubisoft" thing is only used in the NA region. Seriously, look at the covers for the EU region (https://www.mobygames.com/game/216014/prince-of-persia-the-lost-crown/covers/).

[dhaabi]

https://vgcollect.com/item/260831

Developer rejected.

Based on that, should all other entries of the games be edited?

First, it's important to understand that every entry should have information submitted to it on a case-by-case basis. This is because that it's almost guaranteed that no two entries for physical items, even for the same game, will share the same collective information. Of course, it is easy to see how this is true based on fields like Front Art and Barcode, but it impacts fields like Developer and Publisher too. The Genre field is the only exception to this matter as it is the only field that's specifically related to digital—not physical—information.

You may or may not have read this follow-up post to when this sort of topic was also being discussed last year:

Re original conversation for Watch Dogs 2 on Xbone
https://vgcollect.com/item/115089

This item exists in a physical games category, so the entry is for the physical product. Publisher should be reflective of that. The game itself (the game data) is not part of the entry and any information about the game data would be put into description. The game data also has an entry, which is here: https://vgcollect.com/item/202909

So for this instance, the physical game entry would have Ubisoft but the game data entry would have Ubisoft Montreal. It looks like those entries already are like this.

So, as I mentioned in the Admin Comments for your most recent edit submissions upon their rejection, Ubisoft Monpellier Studios should not be supplied to the 260831's Developer field since the back cover specifies that Ubisoft developed the game. However, Ubisoft Monpellier Studios may be supplied to the Description field. Something along the lines of "game data developed by Ubisoft Monpellier Studios" would suffice. Meanwhile, for an item like 260177, nowhere on the item's packaging does it state who the developer is. So, Ubisoft Montpellier Studios would be acceptable to submit in the proper field since that is what's reported on sites like MobyGames.

For what it's worth, I personally find many of the existing entry fields more cumbersome than they are helpful. At least in regards to entries representing physical items, anyway. Because it is only in (relatively) recent years that the distinction between physical and digital categories was recognized, and that physical categories represent physical items and not games, this issue exists. In hindsight, a Developer field being present in physical categories is not ideal, but there is only one entry form field across the entire site which every entry utilizes. Regardless, those fields were created long ago, far longer than when any sort of actual rules and guidelines were authored and implemented. So, they're here to stay probably forever.

And yes, we've had this argument with Ubi time and again. It's especially noticeable because the "Developed and Published by Ubisoft" thing is only used in the NA region. Seriously, look at the covers for the EU region (https://www.mobygames.com/game/216014/prince-of-persia-the-lost-crown/covers/).

For what it's worth, some EU items also specifically mention Ubisoft as both the developer and publisher. For PlayStation family items, anyway.

[theodw]

So, as I mentioned in the Admin Comments for your most recent edit submissions upon their rejection, Ubisoft Monpellier Studios should not be supplied to the 260831's Developer field since the back cover specifies that Ubisoft developed the game. However, Ubisoft Monpellier Studios may be supplied to the Description field. Something along the lines of "game data developed by Ubisoft Monpellier Studios" would suffice.

So, in the end, is a bit of a "why bother filling it up?" thing, if one entry contradicts the other. It would be like Sonic Superstars, where the game was developed by Arzest (with support from Sonic Team), but the box only lists Sonic Team; or various remasters, where the original code was developed by one company and the port was made by another (I'm looking at you, Alan Wake Remastered).

[dhaabi]

So, as I mentioned in the Admin Comments for your most recent edit submissions upon their rejection, Ubisoft Monpellier Studios should not be supplied to the 260831's Developer field since the back cover specifies that Ubisoft developed the game. However, Ubisoft Monpellier Studios may be supplied to the Description field. Something along the lines of "game data developed by Ubisoft Monpellier Studios" would suffice.

So, in the end, is a bit of a "why bother filling it up?" thing, if one entry contradicts the other. It would be like Sonic Superstars, where the game was developed by Arzest (with support from Sonic Team), but the box only lists Sonic Team; or various remasters, where the original code was developed by one company and the port was made by another (I'm looking at you, Alan Wake Remastered).

There is still reason to supply information to the field. I don't see why two entries for the same game having different information would be unwanted, so long as it is correct (that is, as it's reported by the item itself.)

I think the issue really is that people who supply data to entries in physical Games categories need to get in the mindset that these two specific fields—Developer and Publisher—are determined by information on the actual item foremost. The two fields in question are no different than Name or Barcode in that respect. This sort of priority is preferable for those types of entries anyway, because we should strive to gain as much information as we can from items themselves and not in-game data or other site resources. And again, any conflicting or additional information (such as what you've mentioned with Sonic Superstars and Alan Wake Remastered) can be submitted to the Description field like I mentioned before.

We hope to one day avoid this problem altogether with a site overhaul of some kind, but the development work needs to be done. Staff have discussed it amongst another about what kind of steps would need to be taken for such an overhaul, though it may not ever happen even. So all we can do now is to plan ahead with hope for the future while working with the systems that are available to use under the advised guidelines.

[maxelthugduqc98]

I mis-selected game rating when i submitting Forza Horizon 2 - Day One Edition [CA] and i added it twice while trying to correct it with F5. Sorry.
https://vgcollect.com/item/285813
https://vgcollect.com/item/285814
Is that possible to reuse the first link (https://vgcollect.com/item/285813) to resubmit another game with this infos?

GAME INFOS:
Name (English Name):     Forza Horizon [CA]
Platform / Category:    Xbox 360 [NA]
Alt-Name   NA
Release Type:   Official Release
Genre:   Racing
Publisher:   Microsoft Studios
Developer:   Turn 10 Studios
Rating:   ESRB - T (US / Canada)
Release Date:   October 23 2012
Item Number:   N3J-00002
Barcode:   8885370404531
Description:   Box and game disc in English and French.
Box Text:   NA