I think the CPU tags either need a different description or multiple CPU tags in a single game entry should be avoided. The tag description right now says that the tag is for the minimum requirement. So having several tags cpu-286, cpu-386, cpu-486 etc. under the same game entry is somewhat strange. I assume I know why these get added (because thats the CPUs listed officially on the box). But either it should just be the real minimum (or lets say the recommended minium) or the tag description should be changed.
CPU requirement tags
I'm always against tags that could cover most games of a single platform, they just become redundant, not so useful, and are a burden to the DB.
I have been multiple CPU adding tags based on:
The minimum and recommended specs. Because many times, but not always, minimum specs aren't true
The specs of different releases are different.
The game actually does not run on some variants of CPUs. There are a number of 8088 and/or 8086 games that do not run on 286, 386, 486 but run on Pentium or later CPUs.
The game has settings or includes variants for multiple CPUs. I recently added 8088 and 8086 tags to a 286 game because the configuration has a complete Tandy mode that will run the game on 8088 and 8086. Normal mode is indeed limited to a 286 or better. You can't just turn down the settings of normal mode to make it work.
The publisher listed multiple CPUs on the box. Minimum or better is usually assumed, so the publisher probably had a reason to list each CPU variant.
Searching works better if users do not have to plan a complex syntax to confirm witch games run on which hardware. The Tandy 1000 group has some examples of complex search syntax to work around the hardware complexities. Should users really be required to do this for CPUs as well?
But, I will stop if needed.
The minimum and recommended specs. Because many times, but not always, minimum specs aren't true
The specs of different releases are different.
The game actually does not run on some variants of CPUs. There are a number of 8088 and/or 8086 games that do not run on 286, 386, 486 but run on Pentium or later CPUs.
The game has settings or includes variants for multiple CPUs. I recently added 8088 and 8086 tags to a 286 game because the configuration has a complete Tandy mode that will run the game on 8088 and 8086. Normal mode is indeed limited to a 286 or better. You can't just turn down the settings of normal mode to make it work.
The publisher listed multiple CPUs on the box. Minimum or better is usually assumed, so the publisher probably had a reason to list each CPU variant.
Searching works better if users do not have to plan a complex syntax to confirm witch games run on which hardware. The Tandy 1000 group has some examples of complex search syntax to work around the hardware complexities. Should users really be required to do this for CPUs as well?
But, I will stop if needed.
Its really complicated. What is the best handling of the situation? I do not want to get rid of the cpu-tags. Yes we have the problem of minimum-cpu spec and recommended-cpu. For me as a player nowadays its important to know the cpu-spec where a game works "really good" with, but thats because I use DOSBOX and have all cpu-options at hand. Back in the day the minimum might have been more important. But then you said it yourself its often the minimum/recommended that the publisher wrote on the box, which often does not mean the "real" minimum. Recommended is very subjective anyway, in this case the recommended from the publisher. As a player back in the day it was for example very important to know whether it was a 386-only (32-bit) game, which meant it would not run on a 286 and older at all.
To be precise we would need every cpu-tag two times or even more. cpu286-minimum cpu286-recommended. And then write in the group description that this is always the publisher information of minimum / recommended and is not necessarily the "real" minimum / recommended. But splitting those tags makes it even more complicated. So I personally would keep the tags to strictly be for the minimum cpu tag. So generally a single cpu-tag per game entry. Update group description that this is the "official" minimum given by the publisher in cases when that info is available.
To be precise we would need every cpu-tag two times or even more. cpu286-minimum cpu286-recommended. And then write in the group description that this is always the publisher information of minimum / recommended and is not necessarily the "real" minimum / recommended. But splitting those tags makes it even more complicated. So I personally would keep the tags to strictly be for the minimum cpu tag. So generally a single cpu-tag per game entry. Update group description that this is the "official" minimum given by the publisher in cases when that info is available.
I think minimum and recommended CPUs can be handled sufficiently with tag notes.
I think the more CPUs a platform has, the more likely a game's official min/rec requirements will be listed for more than one CPU. I could see if a platform has only two CPU options then one of those will apply to most games once the platform is 100% marked for CPUs. It is simple for that, except for the occasional game that has options for both, only the most common CPU should be applied to entries. But with three or more CPU choices, a most-games scenario seems unlikely. DOS has at least nine CPU choices. Right now the most popular CPU for DOS is less than 26% of all the entries with a CPU tag. This percentage will most likely drop when all DOS entries are CPU tagged. At the very least, there are 3 CPU tags that are not even used yet that will take a piece of the pie.
I think the more CPUs a platform has, the more likely a game's official min/rec requirements will be listed for more than one CPU. I could see if a platform has only two CPU options then one of those will apply to most games once the platform is 100% marked for CPUs. It is simple for that, except for the occasional game that has options for both, only the most common CPU should be applied to entries. But with three or more CPU choices, a most-games scenario seems unlikely. DOS has at least nine CPU choices. Right now the most popular CPU for DOS is less than 26% of all the entries with a CPU tag. This percentage will most likely drop when all DOS entries are CPU tagged. At the very least, there are 3 CPU tags that are not even used yet that will take a piece of the pie.
Brain full engaged, finally. This is all concerning a transitional issue.
https://www.uvlist.net/forum/thread/33232/
Someday UVL will have a system for hardware and the tags can go away.
https://www.uvlist.net/forum/thread/33232/
Someday UVL will have a system for hardware and the tags can go away.