Posts: 1.370
Threads: 142
Joined: Aug 2005
Reputation:
118
I am sure this was discussed in first few pages of this thread too but the question still remains how will you deal with Hardware Requirements of a game? FFX will be listed perfect even by a Celeron user but games like GT4 and MGS3 can be considered close to perfect only by high end users. If you remove hardware requirements I think around 80-90% playable status games can be changed to Perfect.
Even the term perfect isn't perfect in itself. Perfection varies from person to person and perspective to perspective. Even when you look at compatibility list you will read comments like- "game is perfect apart from minor shadow problems" or "game runs perfect apart from some missing sound effects" or "game runs perfect , only few videos don't work". Some other member can report these same issues from a different perspective "game is playable but shadows are messed up" ,"visually the game looks ok but messed up sound takes out all the fun away" or "game isn't the same without the missing videos".
In short, playable in itself is pretty good. That's why compatibility reports have a comments and bugs section. If you feel the game is perfect you can comment there, if the game is playable with bugs you can report there and users will know what to expect from the game.
Posts: 12.837
Threads: 48
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation:
252
If a game has issues of any kind, I'd say it's not perfect.
Posts: 3.031
Threads: 4
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation:
134
GT4 and MGS3 wouldn't qualify for perfect, even if they ran perfect on Celeron processors. Especially GT4 as you can't even complete license tests. I don't think system demands should be considered for perfect rating, unless games can't even be run on modern setups.
And perfect is obviously the wrong name just because of the reasons you mention. Excellent or something similar should be used. I don't think games with missing soundeffects or video's(unless it's just a useless racing/sports game intro video) should be considered an excellent. You have to make a qualifying system for what makes an excellent game. It shouldn't be so hard, just make it factual, not opinion based.
Posts: 21.718
Threads: 401
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation:
476
Location: 私の夢の中
03-16-2016, 08:21 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-16-2016, 08:21 PM by Blyss Sarania.)
We decided a while back to ditch "Perfect" I think because that's very unreasonable and subjective. "Excellent" or similar is good.
As for hardware requirements - I think we also already decided that speed was NOT a deciding factor? Why should it be?
The problem is that our Playable category is just a catch all. It ranges from games that run start to finish but are horribly broken and couldn't be enjoyed to near flawless.
Gaming Rig: Intel i7 6700k @ 4.8Ghz | GTX 1070 TI | 32GB RAM | 960GB(480GB+480GB RAID0) SSD | 2x 1TB HDD
Posts: 3.031
Threads: 4
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation:
134
Has anything been decided regarding hardware vs software renderers? Will both have to be excellent to qualify?
Posts: 21.718
Threads: 401
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation:
476
Location: 私の夢の中
We had originally said "Perfect" would mean "Matches the experience on PS2" and decided since software did that, it was acceptable. For "Excellent" IDK.
Gaming Rig: Intel i7 6700k @ 4.8Ghz | GTX 1070 TI | 32GB RAM | 960GB(480GB+480GB RAID0) SSD | 2x 1TB HDD