Andytizer 269 Share Posted February 11, 2013 So in the sample article we have the order of articles as follows: Availability Improvements Game data Video settings Input settings Network settings *** Other improvements System requirements. Issues unresolved Issues fixed My original thought for having the 'Improvements' section at the top was really to make sure people see things that 99% of people would recommend to install when playing a game. e.g. Dark Souls DSfix, Fallout 1 and 2 content restored patch, KOTOR2 restored content patch, Titan Quest fan patch, etc. However, I want this separate from other improvements, like enabling Ultra settings on Planetside2, or injecting FXAA into a game - which improve the game, but are not essential to enjoyment, and may clutter 'essential' improvements - e.g.: http://pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/PlanetSide ... a_graphics So my thought is to rename the headers 'Essential improvements' and 'Other improvements' and place them in the order as shown above. Any thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newmansan 30 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Sounds fine to me. Just gotta make it clear in the sample article the difference between the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andytizer 269 Author Share Posted February 13, 2013 It may make more sense instead of saying 'Essential improvements', we call it 'Recommendations'. Then we could add a list of things to do/install, not just limited to mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pridit 39 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Why have you moved system requirements before issues? Depending on the title and amount of issues the system requirements would simply get lost, it's much more comprehensive to keep them right at the bottom because if a user wants to find system requirements they can quickly just scroll to the bottom of the page rather than having to navigate between issues and other columns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garrett 212 Share Posted February 19, 2013 System requirements are probably the least important information, so having it last made sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newmansan 30 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Looking at it again, I agree system reqs should be at the bottom of the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andytizer 269 Author Share Posted February 20, 2013 My thought was that system requirements would be part of the 'reference' list, as much as Game data, Video settings, Input settings, etc. and that other content like Issues unresolved, Issues fixed are endless, and that System requirements would get lost at the bottom. However I can see that it's more intuitive to have System requirements at the very bottom of the page, as that's where it is on most websites. Now the question is, do we put the 3 OSes together under 1 header at the bottom? (as we have been doing for the Humble Indie Bundle restoration project). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newmansan 30 Share Posted February 20, 2013 If they share the same reqs across all OS's then yes. If not, I'd suggest putting it at the bottom of each OS heading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts