On the topic of digital games...

[Izret101]

I am
Added a couple extra words to help clarify.

While the argument of wanting to search to see everything does have validity it IMO is what the tool is least used for and will continue to be least used for in the future.

On the rare instances someone is going to be searching to see how many platforms / distribution services i think having to search in each of the databases for those specific instances would be less of a hassle than having to comb through all the "systems" / "genres" / unrelated results on a daily basis.

Personal example:
As someone who is only buying games from a specific series at the moment i use the database to search for just Mortal Kombat. I do i get the benefit of seeing every system/region it has been released for. In addition to the PSN, Steam, etc releases. While unlike some others i DO support digital I don't want those results returning in my searches.

I am not going to jump on eBay and find digital copies of those games, i'm not going to talk to some guy in Europe and see if he can find a copy of MK Komplete for Steam at GAME.
So i keep scrolling past them and have to readjust my count every time a new download is added.

We have multiple users with "junk" folders so they can stop things coming up in their searches. All that does is skew the site statistics. Users having to create "junk" folders to force better search results should be really telling that there is a problem with how things work now.

[Shadow Kisuragi]

...just to clarify what you expect:
Current Behavior:
Search Software, get Software results.
Search all, get all results.

Expected Behavior:
Search Software, get Software results (minus Downloadable Media Format)
Search Digital, get Software results with ONLY Downloadable Media Format
Search all, get all results.

Is this correct?

[Zthun]

I am
Added a couple extra words to help clarify.

While the argument of wanting to search to see everything does have validity it IMO is what the tool is least used for and will continue to be least used for in the future.

On the rare instances someone is going to be searching to see how many platforms / distribution services i think having to search in each of the databases for those specific instances would be less of a hassle than having to comb through all the "systems" / "genres" / unrelated results on a daily basis.

Personal example:
As someone who is only buying games from a specific series at the moment i use the database to search for just Mortal Kombat. I do i get the benefit of seeing every system/region it has been released for. In addition to the PSN, Steam, etc releases. While unlike some others i DO support digital I don't want those results returning in my searches.

I am not going to jump on eBay and find digital copies of those games, i'm not going to talk to some guy in Europe and see if he can find a copy of MK Komplete for Steam at GAME.
So i keep scrolling past them and have to readjust my count every time a new download is added.

We have multiple users with "junk" folders so they can stop things coming up in their searches. All that does is skew the site statistics. Users having to create "junk" folders to force better search results should be really telling that there is a problem with how things work now.

I think what you're talking about here is a lack of filters for what you want to search for.  There's no exclude functionality for types.  When you search for stuff, types is a drop down.  A list of checkboxes would probably solve that problem.  I think the real problem is people are coupling the database architecture with the layout of the UI.

Honestly, splitting the database is not necessary.  Multiple tables in a single database, yes - that would be better, but using two databases when tables would suffice - that's just major overkill.  

[Shadow Kisuragi]

Zthun, he's referring to tables, not databases. We currently have a table for games and a table for hardware under rfgene2_games.

[flyingclimber]

Are the db schemas published anywhere for us to peruse?

[Zthun]

Zthun, he's referring to tables, not databases. We currently have a table for games and a table for hardware under rfgene2_games.

Ah, ok, that's fine then.  So my whole argument is moot at this point.  When you guys were talking about splitting the databases, I thought you meant you were going to split two databases where you would have to do a switch on the db connection in order to query it.  

Then my original point of performance is no longer valid.  You can just the same query multiple tables in the same database.

Normally, when I hear database, I think of the legitimate database object near the root of the server.  Basically, I thought you were talking about doing something like (note, this is for mysql only):

[Server]
    [SoftwarePhysicalDatabase]
            [TableA]
            [TableB]
            [...]
    [SoftwareDigitalDatabase]
            [TableA]
            [TableB]
    [HardwareDatabase]
            [TableA]
            [TableB]

I was like...that's just overkill when you can just do this:

[Server]
    [GamesDatabase]
         [TableCommonData]
         [TableSoftwarePhysical]
         [TableSoftwareDigital]
         [TableHardware]
     

[Shadow Kisuragi]

Surprised so many people are actually interested in the site layout... To be honest, I could always use a hand, especially on the UI side, in getting the site up to modern standards. The PHP 5.5 upgrade (from 4.0) broke quite a few things that we STILL haven't fixed.

In terms of how it's laid out, Zthun's example is pretty close:
[rfgene2]
    [rfgene2_forum]
        [....]
    [rfgene2_games]
        [...]
        [games]
        [hardware]
        [...]

Worth noting that the DB schema, and many of the columns, are in sore need of a refactor. Keys aren't properly used in many instances, which causes a lot of problems - especially with strings.

[techwizard]

Surprised so many people are actually interested in the site layout...

for me i just like hearing technical explanations of why things do or don't work, it's much nicer than a generic "sorry we can't do this" or "that's a bad idea" with no real explanation. transparency is awesome

To be honest, I could always use a hand, especially on the UI side, in getting the site up to modern standards. The PHP 5.5 upgrade (from 4.0) broke quite a few things that we STILL haven't fixed.

i wouldn't mind helping out, but i might be a bit slow at first because i would have to do some research to learn more about php. i could definitely help with hunting down/fixing minor UI bugs, typos, etc around the site.

[flyingclimber]

Happy to advise or potentially code. Do you guys have the schema and code up anywhere to peruse ?

[Shadow Kisuragi]

No - we're not really equipped to actually collaborate for code right now, especially with the fact that we don't even have individual accounts to track or limit access to our database and server. Now that we're getting more people that have more than a passing interest in helping out though, I've definitely been considering it.

[techwizard]

No - we're not really equipped to actually collaborate for code right now, especially with the fact that we don't even have individual accounts to track or limit access to our database and server. Now that we're getting more people that have more than a passing interest in helping out though, I've definitely been considering it.

this site might help too with tracking bugs and showing who's working on what: https://trello.com/

[Shadow Kisuragi]

Funny, trello was being used by one of our managers today. Actually, we're using Mantis here on the site.
https://www.mantisbt.org/