Current Events > So how do you feel about the site's changes to games' "Guides" pages?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Here's an example:

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/switch/189707-the-legend-of-zelda-breath-of-the-wild/faqs

Here's a snapshot of what they used to look like, roughly:

https://web.archive.org/web/20190829001406/https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/switch/189707-the-legend-of-zelda-breath-of-the-wild/faqs

---

---

We're not fucking GameGuides

---

Bump

---

Ewww, No.

Why?

---

Alteres posted...

Ewww, No.

Why?

Probably some dumb crap about trying to optimize the site for mobile users, like with the changes they recently made to review pages.

Neglecting the fact that the page on mobile is just as bad (if not worse) or that they could just have two distinct styles for mobile and desktop.

---

I havent used this site for its Guides or FAQs in over a decade so

Ruddager posted...

I havent used this site for its Guides or FAQs in over a decade so

Eh, fair I suppose. Oftentimes wikis or whatever exist and are sufficient these days after all. GameFAQs being my go to for (non-Pokemon) help is mostly a force of habit.

---

Doe posted...

We're not fucking GameGuides

Gameguides.gamefaqs.gamespot.com

---

Too many white lines when viewing it with blue on black. Kinda makes it look messy, imo.

---

I feel like it's harder to read for some reason.

Ruddager posted...

I havent used this site for its Guides or FAQs in over a decade so

I used a guide the other day to speedrun REmake <_<

I still prefer plain text or html guides for games as long as they're good. Typically it is quicker than watching a whole ass video.

---

Jabodie posted...

I still prefer plain text or html guides for games as long as they're good. Typically it is quicker than watching a whole ass video.

Yeah I understand that too; especially for JRPGs simple text directions are oftentimes faster.

Now, the existence of a good guide is more questionable... Sometimes even the guides GameFAQs pays for are barebones, superficial, incomplete, or otherwise worthless. Bleh.

---

It looks much worse on mobile imo.

The lines aren't differentiated enough, and the different entries seem to blur together.

More busy work bs.

---

Eevee-Trainer posted...

Yeah I understand that too; especially for JRPGs simple text directions are oftentimes faster.

Now, the existence of a good guide is more questionable... Sometimes even the guides GameFAQs pays for are barebones, superficial, incomplete, or otherwise worthless. Bleh.

Hm, I'll be honest, I haven't looked up an actual guide for a modern game in ages aside from things which are usually available in a wiki. And there are a lot of quality guides on older games.

Idk about new stuff.

---

I understand the desire to stream-line information presentation, but the "Highest Rated" tag is too generic (not a link/information-tag to explain how it compares to others).

---

andri_g posted...

I understand the desire to stream-line information presentation, but the "Highest Rated" tag is too generic (not a link/information-tag to explain how it compares to others).

For reference, it basically means the guide has a 77% like/dislike ratio or higher (and at least 20 votes). Roughly the top 1% of guides on the site or so, IIRC

---

Eevee-Trainer posted...

For reference, it basically means the guide has a 77% like/dislike ratio or higher (and at least 20 votes). Roughly the top 1% of guides on the site or so, IIRC

I checked-out a few other releases to see how these updates effect information for the guides listed.

Highest Rated is a "one use per list" reference, but it's used several times (?). In this case Highest Rating, a "one or more uses per list" reference, is more meaningful.

[ Most Recommended is correct because it is a "one use per list" reference and only appears once per release. ]

---

andri_g posted...

[ Most Recommended is correct because it is a "one use per list" reference and only appears once per release. ]

That moniker is a result of the old contribution recommendation system (it was upvote only back then, not both upvote and downvote like today). To get it, you needed something like 200 upvotes on a guide before the system changed. (You can't get them anymore, and hypothetically your guide could have a ton of downvotes but this marker doesn't go away.)

As you might imagine, the names are kinda weird and contradictory, and without something - even a tooltip - to explain the criteria, it doesn't actually communicate much info to the reader.

Having just stars with tooltips was better. At least you didn't have to really deal with the cognitive dissonance this junk induces (even if little more info was actually communicated).

---

I still use guides fairly often, so the new hideous layout bugs me a lot. It seems like every time they come up with some site redesign here it just gets more & more ugly.