VGCollect Forum
VGCollect Site Stuff => Video Game Database Discussion => Topic started by: tripredacus on May 17, 2016, 11:25:47 am
-
Rejected an edit to Nintendo Power v177 Alt cover entry here:
http://vgcollect.com/item/53868
Current image is the retail cover (see barcode). The image edit done was to change to the subscription cover. This cover does not have a barcode on it and would have the address label on the bottom. Another difference is that the retail version does not have the black text box above the top picture on the right, while the subscription version does.
So this topic is for discussion on whether people care about how picky we should be regarding magazine or comic covers. From my own experience in comic collecting, I have not met anyone who cares about having both the retail and sub versions of a comic or magazine.
-
I don't believe people will be that picky either BUT this is a collecting site that prides itself in having variations of games. If we want that variation to trickle down into anything game related like magazines then I see no issue allowing the distinction between a Retail released mag and a Subscription mag (so long as we don't get variations for every Subscription)
Personally I feel that they do not need to be created as separate items in the DB.
-
I see no issue allowing the distinction between a Retail released mag and a Subscription mag (so long as we don't get variations for every Subscription)
Any magazine that has a subscription will have a retail and subscription version for every issue and potentially every cover.
Another way to handle this is to allow both covers on one entry. Such as, putting the other cover type in one of the other picture slots?
Because we can be honest, the site does not have item type templates yet, so magazines do not really fit into the image slots on an entry.
-
I'm okay with separate entries for variation. We have entries for alt covers of games, and I think it's ok to have the same apply to game-related comics/magazines. I believe the late Batman game was released with a comic with an exclusive cover, and Gamestop occasionally has its own exclusive variants as well.
Game Informers tend to have multiple covers. Are those variants already in the db?
-
Why not? We have plenty of variants for other things in our database, like "Greatest Hits" or "Nintendo Selects" reprints, and "Not for Resale" versions of games. I don't see why we should treat magazines any differently.
-
In the EU we only have 1 cover for retail and subscription. I never seen it.
-
Rejected an edit to Nintendo Power v177 Alt cover entry here:
http://vgcollect.com/item/53868
Current image is the retail cover (see barcode). The image edit done was to change to the subscription cover. This cover does not have a barcode on it and would have the address label on the bottom. Another difference is that the retail version does not have the black text box above the top picture on the right, while the subscription version does.
So this topic is for discussion on whether people care about how picky we should be regarding magazine or comic covers. From my own experience in comic collecting, I have not met anyone who cares about having both the retail and sub versions of a comic or magazine.
It depends on what the differences are. As a comic collector, the Todd McFarlane Spider-Man #1 had various covers. They had the direct version with no UPC, the UPC version. The black & silver version with no UPC and one with. The platinum edition. The polybagged with no UPC and one with. Many collectors bought all the variations they could.
As for magazines, some retail and subscription covers are completely different. Star Wars Insider for example has three variations that are all completely different. The subscription cover is a different picture with no barcode or writing except for the logo. The newsstand edition has a different cover with blurbs for the various pieces of content inside. Then there is the Previews Exclusive cover which is different from the other two.
If the only difference is having a place for an address label or not, it's not a big deal in my eyes. At most, the address label is an eyesore.
-
I'm okay with separate entries for variation. We have entries for alt covers of games, and I think it's ok to have the same apply to game-related comics/magazines. I believe the late Batman game was released with a comic with an exclusive cover, and Gamestop occasionally has its own exclusive variants as well.
Game Informers tend to have multiple covers. Are those variants already in the db?
I've added several Game Informer (among other) variant magazine covers to the database myself. If it's a variant (ie different artwork, logo, etc.) then it deserves to have it's own entry.
-
It depends on what the differences are. As a comic collector, the Todd McFarlane Spider-Man #1 had various covers. They had the direct version with no UPC, the UPC version. The black & silver version with no UPC and one with. The platinum edition. The polybagged with no UPC and one with. Many collectors bought all the variations they could.
Interesting to hear that. When I first brought up this way of collecting (pure completionist way) on another forum, everyone thought it was dumb. And that response among a community known for completionists was surprising. It made me realise that there are limits for the majority of a fanbase. I had by then acquired both the direct and retail sets for G.I. Joe and the Transformers #1-4. The thought of having both sets seemed to be a foreign concept, even among toy completionists and comic collectors alike.
I think it is possible that the issue you cite is of significance to comic collector's. Perhaps it is more acceptable to do so with a milestone issue like that, rather than with any other issue. Even other comic collectors I know have a big mix of both issue types and I never hear about people who just go after one vs the other or even both.
PS: for clarity, this topic is about retail vs "direct" differences, which in most cases mean that a barcode is present vs not. Actual cover photos being different are not a problem.
-
PS: for clarity, this topic is about retail vs "direct" differences, which in most cases mean that a barcode is present vs not. Actual cover photos being different are not a problem.
Ah, I see what you mean... Hm, a slight difference like that ... I suppose it depends on how much the collector wants to distinguish their variation. We have minor variations for our games (minor mispellings on back cover text, etc.). Is it a situation where every issue is like that (therefore potentially doubling the number of entries)?
-
I see no issue allowing the distinction between a Retail released mag and a Subscription mag (so long as we don't get variations for every Subscription)
Any magazine that has a subscription will have a retail and subscription version for every issue and potentially every cover.
Another way to handle this is to allow both covers on one entry. Such as, putting the other cover type in one of the other picture slots?
Because we can be honest, the site does not have item type templates yet, so magazines do not really fit into the image slots on an entry.
If it is simply the difference between a cover with a barcode (ie retail) versus address label (ie subscription) then I would think the barcode would be preferable and suffice for both types.
-
Interesting to hear that. When I first brought up this way of collecting (pure completionist way) on another forum, everyone thought it was dumb. And that response among a community known for completionists was surprising. It made me realise that there are limits for the majority of a fanbase. I had by then acquired both the direct and retail sets for G.I. Joe and the Transformers #1-4. The thought of having both sets seemed to be a foreign concept, even among toy completionists and comic collectors alike.
I think it is possible that the issue you cite is of significance to comic collector's. Perhaps it is more acceptable to do so with a milestone issue like that, rather than with any other issue. Even other comic collectors I know have a big mix of both issue types and I never hear about people who just go after one vs the other or even both.
PS: for clarity, this topic is about retail vs "direct" differences, which in most cases mean that a barcode is present vs not. Actual cover photos being different are not a problem.
Ah, I posted a response to you elsewhere on this as well. If the difference is simply barcode versus address label, then one version should suffice and the barcode (ie retail) version would be preferable IMO. Only in cases where the subscription version has a different cover should there be a double entry (or more) to reflect that difference.