bhtav

I've been going through my Commodore 64 disks and feeling nostalgic. Is there a favorite NES or earlier classic you'd like to see an article of? Vectrex? Atari? Amiga? Commodore? TRS-80? An Action Max tape that you adore?

Name it, and I'll give it the article it deserves.

I have it on the Xbone, and it is AWFUL. The GUI is a hot mess with controllers, and the PS folks aren't having any better of a time. Check out Kerbal's official forums under Xbox/PS4 tech support. In my 38 years of being alive, it's the second game I'd take a refund of (Steel Battalion for Kinect being the other)

Regarding points, a more accurate and transparent system would be useful - as an example, I'll spend 20 minutes editing an article which is entirely in second person (grrrrr), move everything into the proper tense, maybe add a few screenshots... and get one point. Is it purely a function of how many bytes the text takes up before and after? I mean, you can rewrite an entire wiki article, and have roughly the same wordcount...

It's confusing.

I would say, (having no authority), that a COI is not a problem on the Giant Bomb wiki, when simply adding facts. One major advantage over Wikipedia, is that there is a much lower bar for notability (any released console or computer game / hardware is basically notable for the purposes of this wiki). There is also virtually no bar for citations. In other words, unless you are blatantly introducing factually inaccurate information, everyone assumes good faith in article edits. Once you have enough points accumulated that you can edit articles without monitoring, you've been adequately vetted (hopefully) and you're free to make edits.

If someone questions a controversial edit in forums, or on that page's internal forum (which practically never get used) simply state that you have first hand knowledge.

This has actually been useful to me - I add and edit mainly obscure old commodore, atari, and other unusual games. Sometimes, the information is hard to find, but it's not difficult to track down some lesser known developers. Some articles that I've done like round about were based entirely on my own memory of the game, and a conversation with the developer - both of which would be major problems on Wikipedia, but don't seem to be here.

I would say that developers introducing factual statements and corrections into this wiki are problem free, and probably even encouraged.

Mods, correct me if I'm off base.

Alias:

Superstar Indoor Sports == Indoor Sports

(it is just "indoor sports" on the diskettes and title screen of the game. Only the box uses "superstar")

@jjweatherman Definitely, definitely get it on PC. It's a phenomenal game, that I'd love to play if I had something other than a Surface for a PC. Unless they patch in a major overhaul to the GUI, buying this game on console is basically giving a donation. Check Kerbal's forums (the xbox and ps4 section) for verification. Man it's bad.

Good GOD this game is a HOT MESS on XBox. The GUI is wholesale just moved to console, with no concessions made for ease of use, basic visibility, 'mouse' acceleration, snapping, dragging, etc... it is, simply, the worst port of a PC game I've ever played, in my 38 years of being alive.

Nomination: Hot Mess 2016. And 2017, because it's that hot of a mess.

Resurrecting this zombie thread. These should get done.

1) The goddamn star-based systems that rate you on open world / RPGs. A LARGE part of the fun is going about a challenge in your own way, and being satisfied that it worked out; OR everything going tits up, and still pulling it out in the end. Then your performance is rated with stars like a kindergarten citizenship mark. Fuck star ratings entirely. Don't give me a lot of ways to go about something, then tell me that the only best way is if I skip everything cool and just do it fast (Metal Gear), or beat some arbitrary list of variables (Assasin's Creed), or... blah. Hate 'em.

2) Mindless collectible padding. A zillion things all over the map that are simultaneously very easy, and very tedious, and rarely have a payoff. They clutter maps, and pad games. This goes for most mini-games in open-worlds. I'm supposed to be immersed in a story when there is a zillion markers for some stupid racing through hoops? How does that fit in with the story? Why am I getting stars for doing it?

It's completely regressive. This crap needs to be trimmed way the hell down, and given story motivation for existing.