Different/Alternative approach on how games are sorted into groups?

[Knopfdruckoffizier]

After using depressurizer regularly its sadly still a hassle of keeping games sorted the way i want... I think there could be a different approach of how the sorting into groups may be done. My idea: I want to set up a group and I want to check different flags/tags/etc of games that will show up in that group. So all i have to do is set up a group called Hidden Object Games and add the Hidden Object flag to that group. After an update all new games that got that information will be put into that group automatically. There may be more flags/tags as requirements, or tags that exclude games. What do you think about it?

[Knopfdruckoffizier]

another example: i have a group called Achievements/(Local) Co-op and a group Achievements/Controller for Achievements/Co-op i would check Achievements AND Local Co-op flag for Achievements/Controller i would check Achievements AND (Full conroller support AND partial controller support) Then i have another group that only holds the Games that support Full conroller support AND partial controller support but NOT Achievements. There could be also some prioritizing added, so that being in one group excludes the game from another group. hope you get the point, if not just ask :)

[ppriest]

I had this thought too - the current approach is great when generating lots of categories of orthogonal properties. As you described, I'd like to create explicit categories which are a function of genres, tags, age, flags etc. If each of the auto-cat modules exposed a list of scoped properties, and a 'Custom' autocat with user-defined rules, where each was a script (e.g. LUA) that returns true/false for each game instance passed to it then you could do a whole lot more.