Some basic ideas...

[cyrix]

So after looking through some of these reviews i had a few thoughts.

1. Only one review per game. If you want to add your review to the thread that allready exists go right ahead. It will keep this more neat and less cluttered.

2. Only recent games. By recent games I mean games that have been released within the past 6 months.

Most of the games from before 6 months ago we've all heard/seen a review of some sort. And people are mostly interested in recent games anyways.

I'm not trying to act like a mod/admin or anything. I just feel these two simple guidelines will help keep this forum clean.

[rappo]

Yeah these are very good rules/guidelines to follow since you don't want a whole mess of unnecessary reviews.

Top notch

Stickified!

[Free Mike]

Good call cyrix and rappo.

This should clear up a lot of the clutter.

[Cooper.]

I dislike the rules.

I don't see why reviewing games more then 6 months old is a bad thing. people still play them, there still good.

[Wando]

Originally posted by cooper0505
I don't see why reviewing games more then 6 months old is a bad thing. people still play them, there still good.

Yea I don't like that '6 month'-rule but that's good that one thread to one game..

[Cooper.]

Yeah. I like that. But not the 6 month thing.

I was thinking it would also be better if people were to post a picture of the game, as to jog peoples memory.

[CowInParachute]

Ugh. I have to say I don't care for the rules much at all. A six month limit is just rubbish. Not everybody will be able to play the latest games, but if they read a review of a game that will not only play on their machine, but is now probably cheap to buy, then they'll take that into consideration more.

And as for the "one review per game" thing, it would simply work so much better if it all took place in the single thread, otherwise poor Mr. B's thread gets fucked up by the big, mean Mr. R when he posts HIS review in Mr. B's topic.

And then, take my Half Life 2 review. I started that a day before it was posted, and by the time it was posted - lo! Another Half Life 2 topic was already up.

I have to say that my prefered rule would be to attempt to make reviews actually longer than fifty words. Not naming any names here, but some of the excellent games reviewed simply don't deserve the half arsed list of features without any discription or examples of how they're implemented in the game. In fact, so far, ZCAB and a couple of others have actually made reviews that were critical, fair and analysed the game in any real detail.

Likewise, I'm not trying to be a mod or anything. Or even a bastard.

[cyrix]

Yes but we don't need numerous reviews on the same game. It's kind of pointless to have several threads reviewing the same game. It's the same principle behind the other forums. You don't have multiple threads talking about the same feature (and those that do pop up are usually closed.) If you go to the majority of game forums that have a forum like this, they are usually kept to one review per game, then you add what you want to the thread. Why have multiple threads that people won't reply too much? If you have one thread then people will reply in that one thread and it will encourage more discussion.

As for the six month thing. Look...no offense to the person who reviewed Vice city...but I'm pretty sure the vast majority of us on here have played the game. We have an entire forum dedicated to it. And I've seen several games reviewed that are well into the greatest hits collection on any console. So far the majority of the games (with the exception of like 4 or so...) have been recent. So I don't see why it's rubbing you guys the wrong way.

some good ideas there cyrix.

[ZCAB]

I think these are all good ideas. The six-month rule, however, is not. Sure, reviewing GTA-VC on a GTA forum is not a very good idea, but things like Raven Shield? Or Unreal Tournament 2004? People should be able to review those, since not everyone has played them.

I was actually planning on reviewing Unreal (1998) :p

[cyrix]

We'll put it to a vote then I suppose. Either way it goes doesn't matter to me. I'll make a thread with a poll it will be open for 2 weeks then we'll see where we go from there.

[Pran]

As far as the 1 review per game thing goes, there's no point in posting another review about a game which says the same thing and gives the same rating. If you think a game got a review it didn't deserve, you should post another review of your own opinion in the same thread, provided its not the same thing.

[CowInParachute]

But there's more to it than just "if a review's already been posted, then fuck you". Some of these reviews are just, to be absolutely blunt, bloody painful to read.

[cyrix]

Like reviews that are about 2 sentences? Those...ugh....

This is why I'm against multiple reviews...even if it's differring opinions. It creates a waste of a thread.

[CowInParachute]

Originally posted by cyrix
Like reviews that are about 2 sentences? Those...ugh....

A+

But anyway, would it not be easier to just let those topics die rather than base all game talk within them, where the replies are longer than the actual review itself?