(12-19-2014, 05:11 PM)Coornio Wrote: [ -> ]Instead of a 6th star, just do a single larger star with exception icons like previously suggested.
- SR only
- High Requirements
- Needs cheat workaround
etc.
..we don't use stars.
For starters, I'll change the script to also accept status=6 and add some of that stuff to the compatibility key and the post your test results thread
so, is the definition of the perfect rating stabilized.
Yes, a 7 page discussion was enough I believe
(12-23-2014, 05:12 PM)ssakash Wrote: [ -> ]how about defining the requirement for perfect rating as follows:- games that run without any graphical glitches (or) bugs in default settings without the requirement of software rendering.
in my personal opinion, this simplifies the definition and is more suitable for perfect rating. what do you guys think about it ?
As Bositman and myself have said, a 7 page discussion was had, and a consensus was reached.
We ALL agreed software rendering was acceptable. Even if we re have this discussion, you are gonna be the only one in favor of removing that requirement.
What ever came of this? Did it ever get implemented? I'd love to see this included in the compatibility rating system. I can't fathom titles like Final Fantasy X being seen as having the same level of compatibility as something like DRIV3R which looks like this:
http://wiki.pcsx2.net/images/d/d1/DRIV3R_Forum_1.jpg
I still think games for perfect rating should only be considered when they have no bugs on the hardware renderer. there are some games which look quite bad in hardware mode compared to the software renderer and shouldn't really be considered perfect.
Most of the people don't use software renderer , they use hardware renderer for upscaling and other enhancements. so I still strongly support that Perfect rating should only be given if the game doesn't consist of any bugs on the hardware renderer.
I suggest removing the "playable" rating and adding "completable", "excellent" and "perfect" ratings in its place. "Completable" - or "Finishable"- is for games that can be completed from start to finish but with heavy bugs or slow downs, an "excellent" rating for perfect in software or almost perfect in hardware, and a "perfect" rating for the games that are actually perfect in everything including hardware.
Marking a game that everyone complains about as "perfect" is just false advertising, and will be a nice and needless source of pleasant comments like "they call this (PERFECT)":
![[Image: uE4ct.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/uE4ct.jpg)
Enjoy explaining to them what perfect rating means.
Plus, a detailed rating system is actually helpful for development, not just for users. A huge jump from " can be finished but can be very glitchy, not sure" to "perfect in software but maybe completely broken in hardware, I don't know" is not very helpful for anyone, users or developers.