This was mentioned briefly sometime in the past, and i think it's a great idea.What it means is more reviews for the same game.For example the review for Kyrandia 2 was done by me.So Picard has a few things to add to the review, or he thinks the review is not worthy of the game(quality wise).So he makes another review.The second review would be linked through a link at the bottom of the page.So as to not arrouse any conflicts the first review for the game would still be the primary review(ie the first review you see when you access the game page).:

Also another suggestion i wanted to make was that all the guides in the troubleshooting forum be moved to the main section of the site, it would be more convenient for the visitor.We could have a guide section, just under the FAQ

The layout for the page could be something like this:

Hey that'd be a cool idea, gives a different perspective from another user, broadens the opinion base.

And increases the work of the translators with an umlimited amount.

basically this is a nice idea, omuletzu!

but i think, providing another complete review make it difficult for users to focus
on the most important details. we could supply a subsection containing additional
information, which have been neglected in the main review. however i think adding
multiple reviews would make it not easy to get a brief impression of the game...

the actual situation is, that any additional information for a game are handled in
the according thread in the forum. it IS useful to make a note about vital data,
which have been left out in the main review, but this should not be done in a
separate area, if not absolutely necessary...

Maybe. But then it would prevent some mistakes I saw in a few certain reviews. Plus people would not bitch about not being able to review their fave game because somebody else is doing that. In the large scope, you and Kosta would also get your reviews _much_ faster, as if two people are working separately on same game, they begin to compete, since each wants _his_ review to be the one on the main site.
You could also introduce a review rating system. So that the review with the highest rating shows up as the primary one. Would increase quality of some reviews a damn lot...

you wouldn't need to translate all the reviews then, just the main one. i'm not sure - there are some reviews that are pretty naff tbh - especially some of the early ones where the focus was just on getting things up, but on the other hand it might discourage some people from writing reviews (or encourage them, not sure which...)

This implies that there would be one than one exstra review for some games, and probably quite a few for the most popular ones. Frankly, if people want to review their favourite game, they can do it at amazon ot moby.

I agree that some of the reviews are aren't very well done. Some are too short and some fail to do anything but deliver shallow praise for the game in question. That said, I'm not sure I think this is a good idea. What if the new review for a certain game is just as bad? Will it be accepted? And how many reviews for one game will be accepted? I'd hate to see a situation where a game like Monkey Island has 100 reviews. I mean it's not like anybody will ever read them.

The best solution, IMO, would be if someone could enhance the already existing reviews, without changing what it already says (basically just writing exstra stuff in a review). That way both the original writer and the new one would be credited for writing it. Of course this would require some good quality control, as the goal is to increase quality, not quantity.

*edit*

I agree about moving the guides to the main section. That would definitely help a few people, and avoid some of the usual "how do I run this game" questions.

That's why I suggested a rating system. And, I don't think that there would be so many reviews around... if I am wrong, there can always be a minimum size cap of around 200 words (preventing "wooot woot woot diz game ROXXORZ TEH BIG 1!!! oneoneone111!!!" situations) and a limit of about 10-15 reviews max per game.
It's always good to see a different point of view on a particular title too.

And, I don't mean bad reviews, I mean those that were really screwed up (sometimes the reviewers were lazy and made things up as they went).

I really don't see how these reviews couldn't serve a purpose.I mean they're just there, if you want to read them, click the link, if you only want an impression on the game, skim through the primary review, and get your opinion.
If you want to know more about the game, go to another review, if you're satisfied then just download it.It's as simple as that.
My point proven, there is one situation that stands: more workload for the translators.This is a problem indeed.Perhaps the secondary reviews would be neglected, and only the primary reviews would get translated... of course this is only a short time solution.Eventually you would still have to translate the reviews, and by then their numbers would be sky high...

I agree with Omuletzu completely... Infact, I mentioned that idea some time ago, but it didn't get adequate response...

That's right, but one of the big strenghts of Abandonia lies in the multi-language-capability. This is the point, which makes the site popular on many link-sites I've seen so far. (That is for german, but I could imagine that this counts for other languages sites as well.) So we should keep our focus on this strengh, which means to translate all contents. This leads to:

Therefore I agree to Flop:

But there are problems with this method too:

You have to find someone who takes care of these improvements. let's say one for the review + one for each language, as the improvents also have to be translated. The person who is in charge of the improvements has to be notified of lacks in the reviews. Then he has to look them up, occasionally test them out, improve the review, and notify the translators of the changes he made... nice job!

A solution would be to assign the updaters to take care of the games discussion threads, as most suggestions are made within these by guests. They could also change the reviews or notify the reviewers to change them. Then the changes have just to be translated. Still much work (esp. for the old settled updaters). And what about older reviews with the reviewer's retired from the site and the forum? Are they considered as "abandoned"?

You see, quality management is plenty of work...

As a last point you have to remind, that if you want quality AND quantity (more than one review per game) that amount of work grows exponentially. You should consider if all this is worth the benefit of it.

As a member of the Grammar Squad, this idea makes me cry.

I 200% agree with Omuletzu!

Let's say Sensible Soccer or Civ 1. IMHO those reviews aren't worth those games. Also some other people said that those reviews aren't that good, so I would love to write my own reviews for that games.

nah...

1 review is enough :not_ok:

please don't give names, the people in cause might feel offended.Suffice to say some reviews need some tweaking

please don't give names, the people in cause might feel offended.Suffice to say some reviews need some tweaking [/b][/quote]
Kosta reviewed those games! :bleh: :ph34r: :ph34r: :ph34r: :ph34r: :ph34r:

Ouch... it was nice knowing you buddy

I was thinking about similar idea, after visiting game spot.

If you don’t know, at their site they have an official game spot review, but users (not all of them, just paid users and the one with level of 6 or higher) can write reviews.

Reader can select if he agree or disagree with review, and if he trust reviewer. Also there is a list of all reviewers with number of the games they reviewed, and number of people who trust their judgment.

I know this would be a lot of programming, and I believe that I might be able to help with some part of it, but something similar to this would be great.

hehe

Nice action :whistle:

I'm (again) completely for this idea. Sorry Kosta and Maikel, but GET ON WORK! LOL :ph34r: :ph34r: :ph34r:

*goodbye blue sky - I'm dead this time*

Not forgetting about the grammar squad's work also...

Anyway this thing will discourage people to review games that aren't reviewd yet...
If i can write a review for Xcom instead of a game waiting to be reviewd ill gladly do it. Hence slowing the game adding precedures. Anyway it will also generate a lot of work for admins coz they have to change the script on the translated sites so that the international admins can c which game has been translated once or twice....

It is a good idea but is it worth the effort?

Exactly. From what I understand, there's a lot of games waiting in line, with only the review missing until they can be uploaded, so maybe the people eager to write should concentrate on new reviews, rather than reviewing the same games over and over again?

But you guys are forgeting that major Abanodnia's idea is to have quality over qunatity. Also, most of reviews are biast, as people mostly try to get the game they liked or know for a long time.

With multiple review you'll be able to select reviewer with taste simillar to yours and read only his reviews, as hi will probably choose the games simillar to your taste.

Check this official review for AVP2 at game spot:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/aliensve...or2/review.html

and now check users reviews:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/aliensve...r2/readers.html

(make sure you have your pop-up blocker on while visiting this site)

Also notice 'Trusted by' note belove avatar for some reviewers.

I totaly approve of the fact that this is a great idea said it before.....But it has some disadvantages mentionned earlier if these can overlooked i am totally for the idea!

But wouldn't that make the reivews even more BIAS?

IF the game is already up and has a review - will anyone really make a review of a game he/she doesn't care about?
We'll get either reivews saying how great the game is, or those saying huw much the game sucks (might be a quality review, but I doubt anyone will go reviewing a game he/she doesn't feel strongly about).

I suggest we do a list of reviews that NEED re-writing instead. I know some reviews aren't that good (look at what happened with the old Monkey Island review). The old one wasn't good, now we have a different (and better one). Siply because Fawfulhasfury wanted to make a better review (and they used my screenshots). I've no idea anymore who wrote the original review (but there's a translation of it on the Slovene site - so you can compare the size of both reviews - doubt you know enough Slovene to compare the meaning).

Why all reviews have to be translated?

Only main/official review can be translated, and reader’s reviews should be in language of their choice. (Someone might review the game in their native language, but does not speak English, so why we need to translate it??)

This is multi/language community, but main language is English, so let’s leave it that way. ;)

Are the reviews that big a part of Abandonia though? I mean, how many people actually do read them?

I do, and according to game forums, a lot of users read them.

I also, as you can see read a lot of reviews at GameSpot, just to get other view of some games.


Seba, a lot of games you guys rated high in your review I would done differently as I had play some of them on Amiga. Just option of telling what you think about the game is great. (We done it in forum, but it's not that great place for reviews as next post might be a hate this game, or this game does not work...)


We should have some grading scale, as they have at gamespot, where you earn points / levels by rating the game, writing review, posting in forum, adding more screen shots to the game (this one would be nice, check screen shots section of gamespot), adding even videos of the game play if possible.

But this requier a lot of work to be done, and does not have to be done at once.

Why all reviews have to be translated?

Only main/official review can be translated, and reader’s reviews should be in language of their choice. (Someone might review the game in their native language, but does not speak English, so why we need to translate it??)

This is multi/language community, but main language is English, so let’s leave it that way. ;) [/b][/quote]
The problems with the translations are that in our international admin login we have all the games that are translated and all the games that need to be translated. Thats why we cant put things like 'coming soon' for reviews we havent translated yet coz the counters will get messed up... Its a problem that only Kosta know if its a small or big problem if he could or not fix this.
I support the idea of more than one review coz i disagree with a lot of reviews and dont find them really expressive.

Why does people has to have more and more ??

Why cant they be happy with just 1 good thing in life??? :blink:

how about if people want to reviw the game htey just put it in the games forum posting,.,,

Nah..

When doing like this people will get more motivated for old reviews..

Better concentrate on new ones :ok:

When you grow up, you'll figure it out for us. :whistle: :sneaky: :tomato: LOL

Why have one, when you can have many good things? :sneaky: :sneaky: :sneaky:

i`m grown up know.

Almost getting childs at this forum :ok:

Get back on topic, people. :whip:

:Tom: :kosta: :kosta: :kosta:


What's your opinion :Tom: ?

More work = more hazzle = more problems.

If a review stinks, then whoever is unhappy should PM the reviewer and asking if they are allowed to make another review for the game.

So you don't believe gamespot's reader review is worth checking?

Nothing has to be wrong with main review; you just can have different opinion, and might like to point them.

I believe that there is only more work to program this, and I can understand that programmers do not have enough time.

But this idea is great, even if don't do it.

There you go. I made a poll, because I think we all should vote. My vote goes to 'Yes, I'm supporting this idea.'
http://www.abandonia.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=4427

I agree with Seb and Mad-E-Fact. There're too many games that still need a review. Why focus on the games that're already reviewed then? Seb's idea of making a list for games that need to be re-reviewed, like the one 'bout the screenshots, should take care of the crappy reviews. Starting multiple reviews for a game seems like putting a stop to adding quality games to Abandonia's database and just bloating the popular games, while those games that could be awesome too but have a lacking review will still stay out in the cold.

I totally agree. Perhaps we should team up with some others and make a list of the re-reviewable games as a first step?

I disagree with seba.The people that made those old reviews(Kosta, Checkbox, Maikel even) were the ones that struggled to make this site rose.We can't just brush their reviews aside.If they dedicated their time then, when abandonia was nothing more than a desire, then it means something.
And as for the programming... what could it be so hard??
You aren't changing the layout of the page, you are just inserting a link at the end of the page.It's like turning a page if you will.When you click the link to another review, that review is presented, together with it's own screenshots.
And as far as i'm concerned it shouldn't be something like "we made two reviews for one game, now we have to do the same for all".If you want to review a new game, review a new game, if you think you might have something to add to an existing review, make a review for an existing game.It's not like we're saying from now on we only make reviews for old games... at least that's the way i see it.

Nah..

If someone wanna do my reviews PM me..

I must think about it

Or i have a better idea:
If you want to make a second review to a game, you also have to make a review for a game that's waiting one.In this way we prevent n old reviews, and no new reviews.Of course the review for the new game would be thoroughly checked, because some might make a good review for an old game and a s**** new review, just to be allowed to make the old one :crazy:

Think it`s a too big barrier for people to start reviewing then :not_ok:

That was why I wanted to make a list first, so you can ask the "old" reviewers, if they agree to an improvement. I don't want to brush any review aside. My suggestion would be to brush it up, send the text to the reviewer first and let him comment it. In this way it stays his review, with his work inside it and he has still the possibility to alter the improvements. My point are mainly real mistakes in reviews, e.g. dosbox labels for games not running in dosbox etc. I've read several times in games discussion threads about these things, don't know if they are true, though.

titan, maikel, braindead, kosta, don't you guys have an opinion??

That was why I wanted to make a list first, so you can ask the "old" reviewers, if they agree to an improvement. I don't want to brush any review aside. My suggestion would be to brush it up, send the text to the reviewer first and let him comment it. In this way it stays his review, with his work inside it and he has still the possibility to alter the improvements. My point are mainly real mistakes in reviews, e.g. dosbox labels for games not running in dosbox etc. I've read several times in games discussion threads about these things, don't know if they are true, though. [/b][/quote]
You don't have to ask them, because you wont touch their reviews, you will just make new ones and add them at the bottom of the page/of their reviews....in link.

Unknown Hero's got the point right there.

You don't have to ask them, because you wont touch their reviews, you will just make new ones and add them at the bottom of the page/of their reviews....in link. [/b][/quote]
I'm pretty sure that bobbin is, in fact, talking about changing some of the existing reviews, and not just making new ones. Personally I think it's a good idea. With all respect for the people that made those reviews, some of them really aren't very good and that's a shame since a lot of those games deserve better.

It's a good idea to ask the original reviewer first, though. That way they have a chance of making the changes themselves or at least look over the changes before they are put on the site.

*edit* I just realised; if people want to write their own reviews, can't they just do it in the topic dedicated to that game? It does say "Feel free to comment and discuss this game" after all. A review is basically just an extended comment anyway.

No i fermly oppose, and i think Kosta does too.You cannot replace those reviews, as bad as they are, and that's how the whole concept of secondary reviews was born... to find way to make better reviews for existing games WITHOUT brushing aside the ones already there... it's not fair to throw to the garbage bin the work of somebody, especially when he helped the site right from the start, when, many of you weren't here.They helped the site when we didn't even have a forum

But I know of a review that has been replaced (The Secret of Monkey Island). I've no idea who replaced it, but the current review is by Faufhulfury and not a bad one - the previous was done by someone else (don't know who) and was just about 10 lines, not giving much information...

Well reviews should not be replaced, the reviews should just be added.

I'm with Omu and IS on this - as I tried to explain many times to that einherjar guy, we shouldn't be removing other people's work or replacing it just because it doesn't fit some people's ideas about the standards we should have, and most of the lower-quality reviews are from the very beginning of the site before there was a large community to help with reviewing; for instance, almost all of the reviews written by Kosta are very short and to-the-point because they were among the earliest.

Maybe not that much on the forum?? :blink:

Maybe not that much on the forum?? :blink: [/b][/quote]
Titan = very occupied with real life
Maikel = very busy with school and slaving for Kosta
Braindead = he already stated his view, I think
Kosta = has been dead the last 3 days, and is busy getting back on track with e-mails and creating work for his slaves.

I'm still thinking about wheter I find it to be a good idea or not. Sure it can be helpful, but it's also a lot of work and time you could also use to search other great games to add on the site. Plus I know the busiest man of all has to implement it. namely Kosta.

hehe TOM,

And what are you for Kosta??? :bleh:

Hey!

Even though there are some good ideas for implementing multiple topics, I will have to say that I'm against it. First of all its a lot of work to implement, and because of some other duties at the moment I can't even begin to think about it. Secondly, as you all know it, it would be very demotivating for the translator / grammar crews, and translating to more languages is more important than having a few reviews for every game. Thirdly, I think one review per game is enough as having more would be confusing for the reader, and I doubt someone would really bother to read multiple reviews for one game.

I think the only time anyone would bother to read multiple reviews is if the first one was a bit short or you thought it didn't give a very good overview of the game, and the majority of the reviews on the site do that just fine, particularly the newer ones for the reasons described above; the most recent reviews written by people like myself and wendy (off the top of my head - there are more too) have been many times longer and more detailed than the early ones, and TBH I'd be a bit upset if anyone had enough of a problem with my review to want to replace/supplement it.

In fact, I would like to change my vote to a "No".

Maybe we could close it..

The master/god/the almighty said NO so i think no need to discuss on :angel:

agreed