Jump to content

Waschbär

Member
  • Content Count

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Waschbär

  1. Sounds pretty good so far. Some quick things that come to mind.

     

    Search bar:

    Since we have effectively 2 search bars on the home page this should be a given. Maybe we could remove the big search bar entirely and highlight the one in the top nav bar a bit more instead (white, or lighter grey background inside the search bar and maybe a bit wider).

     

    Recent changes:

    Not sure if this is needed as in such a small scale it doesn't provide much information. On the full page on the other hand you can see right away what and how much has been done. It's just that the link is a bit hidden if you don't know about it. Again, maybe just highlight it more.

     

    Changelog:

    Is this something a normal user really needs to see? Announcements should be visible but stuff that is mainly aimed for editors isn't interesting for normal visitors I guess (maybe it can be filtered depending on being an anonymous or registered user?)

  2. 2 hours ago, Aemony said:

    This all means that occasionally minor stuff gets overlooked or isn't fully updated in one place when a larger change is pending that will overwrite it anyway.

    So while such things might occur, they are not because of a lack of engagement from the staff.

    I didn't mean to imply that of course. Just that things may move a bit too fast at times so things get overlooked, like you mentioned. So thank you for updating those pages.

  3. On a sidenote: Is it really necessary for the "series" table to be replaced by the taxonomy link? Not only does it give a quick overview but also allows one to jump quickly between the titles. Now I have to visit another page - which also doesn't offer much more valuable information.

    I think this would be one case where a duplicate information is acceptable. And if it's about the number of titles for some series becoming longer and longer, maybe just make the table collapsible and only show a handful until someone clicks "expand" or something.

  4. I mean, I see some value in this information, but as it looks now I spend more time on the infobox than the whole rest of a page. Looking at the Taxonomy page and this huge list of variables is kinda overwhelming and confusing. Especially when a game can have multiple categories in a single section (I do wonder what the final infobox for a GTA game will look like with all its gameplay systems and different vehicles for example).

     

    And with all the recent changes I also find there is a lack on updating/improving the editing guide.

    https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/PCGamingWiki:Editing_guide/The_infobox

    The reception part is still missing the part of which IDs to provide.

     

     

    https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/PCGamingWiki:Editing_guide/Microtransactions

    Here it refers to an empty page to look for the terminology: https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Microtransactions which I guess should actually be this https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Category:Microtransactions

    In reality however all that information should be on the same page.

    And why not feature an example directly on the page like in other sections (video editing guide for example). Instead I have to jump between different tabs all the time just to figure out how I'm supposed to fill in everything.

    Then there is the link to the Taxonomy page as it must correspond with that but when visiting it all I see under "Instructions" is a changelog where I somehow have to piece the information I need together myself on this huge and unwieldy page.

     

    Same applies to the Monetization section

    https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/PCGamingWiki:Editing_guide/Downloadable_content_(DLC)_and_expansions

    Again: No examples, have to jump to different pages for all the info, the "Please refer to Monetization article" link leads nowhere and again that link to the Taxonomy main page which isn't helpful at all.

     

    What I'm trying to say is: If that taxonomy stuff isn't ready or properly presentable yet, it shouldn't be part of the editing guidelines.

     

     

     

     

     

     

  5. 1 hour ago, Aemony said:

    #1: Remove unofficial wikis only, and keep official wikis when possible.

    This would be my choice if any change would have to be made and it is the way I've been listing wikis in the past. Usually these are the ones that are linked on a games official website.

     

    However, all the above mentioned problems can just as well be applied to fan sites and not only wikis. So this discussion should probably concern both types of content.

  6. Sorry to bump this topic back up but I'm interested to hear some opinions on this.

     

    In the case of AC: Origins, the game has a good amount of settings (which isn't a good key point as was discussed here) but also visually displays the differences (see https://youtu.be/AjbbuWMR94A?t=877). Very hand in my opinion and haven't seen it very often yet. It also includes a benchmark which on same pages is already a ++ point. So I guess putting both points in one combined line would be acceptable?

     

    But then there is the case of COD:WWII (see https://youtu.be/x3llyXsUTKI?t=52) Pretty much the same thing but no benchmark this time. So would just the visualization of the graphics settings alone be worth a positive key point?

  7.  

    Feel free to mark it false if the page is incorrect.

     

    It is not necessarily false since it does offer more than standard dialogue subtitles. It's just that it doesn't feature everything like HL2.

    But I don't think that is necessary since, like I said, movies also don't describe every gunshot and every explosion.

     

    Could the Closed Caption thing just be removed? It's barely used for anything and most text could just fit in the subtitles field. It's not like TV Closed Captions where they are automated, Half Life 2 calls them closed captions but they are still subtitles in the end, just with a bunch of extra stuff.

     

    I really don't see the point, it's confusing and it's just extra clutter. Could always use the note field for anything more specific.

     

    There are 196 games set to true (https://pcgamingwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Special:SearchByProperty/Closed-20captions/true&limit=500&offset=0&property=Closed+captions&value=true) However from the games I remember in this list, most of them are just subtitles actually. There are also a lot of isometric games which are heavily text based (or Civilization), which, just like I said in the first post, are hard to define.

     

    I'm still a bit conflicted of removing it entirely however.

  8. While currently playing Prey I noticed that somebody marked Closed Captions for this game as true. And while it does offer subtitles for all dialogues, it only partially offers them for sound effects. For example, the sound of some of the robotic devices gets described if you are near them, but things like shooting, breaking glass, explosions or alien noises do not.

     

    The editing guide mentions "Text accompanied with all audio in-game." so in this case it should probable be false then, right?

     

    However, I've checked a couple of pages which makes me unsure about the setting in general. Dragon Age Origins has it enabled and while it is heavily text based, things like sounds (or combat chatter IIRC) has no subtitles. Same goes with other classical RPGs.

     

    Now looking at some Bluray movies with SDH subtitles, not every noise necessarily gets described - at least not in dramatic/action scenes.

     

    So I think we need some better clarification as to when CC should be true, false or N/A. Especially with the different genres in mind (e.g. adventure games). I know this is generally a rare feature but it seems even the Steam store often lists it for games which only feature normal subtitles.

×
×
  • Create New...