03105: quizmeku: Year is listed as 1994, but title screen shows 1992.

ID	Category [?]	Severity [?]	Reproducibility	Date Submitted	Last Update
03105	Documentation	Trivial	N/A	Apr 11, 2009, 19:12	Apr 16, 2009, 22:19

Tester	Braille	View Status	Public	Platform	MAME (Official Binary)
Assigned To	etabeta	Resolution	Fixed	OS	Windows XP/Vista 32-bit
Status [?]	Resolved			Driver	sega/segas24.cpp
Version	0.130	Fixed in Version	0.131	Build	Normal
		Fixed in Git Commit		Github Pull Request #

Summary	03105: quizmeku: Year is listed as 1994, but title screen shows 1992.
Description	Title screen image shows 1992 as the game's year.
Steps To Reproduce
Additional Information
Github Commit

Flags
Regression Version
Affected Sets / Systems	quizmeku

Attached Files	0000.png (16,172 bytes) Apr 11, 2009, 19:12

No.04187 Fujix Administrator Apr 11, 2009, 19:44	Actual release date of the game is May 1993.
No.04188 Haze Senior Tester Apr 11, 2009, 20:52	displayed copyright year of earliest (released) revision is usually used for 'year' field.. in this case, 1992.
No.04189 Braille Tester Apr 11, 2009, 21:24	So, can I consider MAME´s official criteria as this copyright year? Because there are others reports I want to send in this line.
No.04190 Tafoid Administrator Apr 11, 2009, 22:08	If you have a bunch, it would be better to list them at a forum (as you have been) rather than posting more bugs about them. The MAMEDev read the .info forum enough to be able to determine and add the information as you post it. Thanks.
No.04191 Fujix Administrator Apr 12, 2009, 07:48 edited on: Apr 12, 2009, 07:49	I don't mean I have any objection to the current policy of MAME. It is just for your trivia, just suggesting the game has been "matured" in the company :)
No.04193 Haze Senior Tester Apr 12, 2009, 10:41	Well afaik what I've stated has been the general policy, although there have been a few exceptions. If a 1990 game, ends up with a 1994 revision, that wouldn't make it a 1994 game. It would be a 1994 revision of a 1990 game. However, if the year on such a set was set to 1994, and you looked at the parent roms in MAME, then it would give a scewed idea of the order in which games were made. (and in the case of many games, the title screens retain the original year, see some cps2 sets for example) The previous policy was also that bootlegs would share the date of the original game, rather than the date (which could be false / hacked) shown on the bootleg. However, in many cases, the dates shown on the bootlegs are used. This isn't helped by the Korean games, which in many cases are bootlegs, but are also definitely independant releases, many years later than the games from which they were hacked. Using the year of the game they were hacked from makes no sense in this case. Like many things in MAME, the actual policy is 'use your common sense' Anything else should be treated as a guideline.
No.04200 etabeta Developer Apr 13, 2009, 11:20	In this specific case, I would use the release date as mentioned in arcade books, with a note in the source specifying that the date is correct despite the title screen It seems the more 'use your common sense'-like solution. Any objections?
No.04204 Haze Senior Tester Apr 13, 2009, 16:59	as long as the reasoning is fully explained, and you're sure there was no 1992 release, then yes.
No.04205 Braille Tester Apr 13, 2009, 17:00	Gentlemen, my only request is that you define objectively this rule. The copyright way is a more technological view, wich gives a better idea of what's going on in that time (in my humble opinion, the best law). The release date is a commercial approach, based on the market. This issue may seems trivial, but you should remember that lots of games databases relys on MAME, so this is crucial for historical purposes. And notice that the gap between both approachs may be years (a life time in technology). So, wathever your decision is, make it very clear. Thanks for the discussion!
No.04208 etabeta Developer Apr 14, 2009, 08:54	I think that we should use the release date, when available and confirmed. Adding in the driver source a note about the different copyright on the title screen. However, I'm open to suggestions (BEFORE sending a diff which changes those years ;) )
No.04210 etabeta Developer Apr 15, 2009, 07:51	After thinking a bit more on this, I changed my mind. I would actually prefer the following: * drivers should output the copyright year when present (up to the 'common sense' exceptions mentioned by haze and few others) * release dates could go in mamedriv.c (where a lot of these informations already have been added) and, possibly (but it's up to the driver author), in comments included in the source Since no one else came up supporting my previous position, I think I can fix a few of the mentioned issues to make year agree with the copyright at title screen, with general consensus.
No.04212 Braille Tester Apr 16, 2009, 21:51	Summarizing the discussion: Game (MAME year) -> Copyright (title screen) / Release Date (Shima Pong book) System 16 Dynamite Dux (ddux) 1989 -> 1988 / 1988 Excite League (exctleag) 1989 -> 1988 / 1988 Sukeban Jansi Ryuko (sjryuko) 1987 -> 1988 / 1988 System 18 Bloxeed (bloxeed) 1990 -> 1989 / 1990 System 24 Quiz Rouka wo Wasuremashita 1994 -> 1991 / 1991 Quiz Mekurumeku Story 1994 -> 1992 / 1993 System 32 Arabian Fight 1992 -> 1991 / 1992 Jurassic Park 1994 -> 1993 / 1994 Rad Mobile 1991 -> 1990 / 1991
No.04213 etabeta Developer Apr 16, 2009, 22:19 edited on: Apr 16, 2009, 22:19	in next version, these games will have years reflecting title screens. released dates which differ are noted in comments and in mamedriv.c