| 10-12-2004 03:22 AM | ||
| evilded |
Quote:
 I think I mentioned that earlier
|
|
| 09-12-2004 12:53 PM | ||
| marko river |
Seabatations is right! Reviewer should mention what kind of game it is, if that's useful. For certain games there is no need even for that. I think that current ratings system is fine and quite enough. We can ses editors rating (should be from man who really played the game) and people's rating. If you ask me, this shouldn't change at all. As paul said: good to see new ideas  |
|
| 09-12-2004 12:18 PM | ||
| Iron_Scarecrow | And the king seduces the queen. LOL | |
| 09-12-2004 11:59 AM | ||
| Sebatianos |
Well the reviewer might say that a game is for children - or only for dirty perverts,... But I'm not for a rating system. Just where would you put let's say Battle Chess - it's a chess for crying out loud - but you might rate it 15+ because the knight chops off all limbs before killing the opponent's piece... |
|
| 09-12-2004 05:09 AM | ||
| evilded | Maybe just be sure to mention if a game is very gory/adult in the review... | |
| 08-12-2004 08:49 AM | ||
| The Niles | No reason to be sorry. It was a good idea but it is rather inpractical to put it into service. | |
| 08-12-2004 07:36 AM | ||
| Eagle of Fire |
I voted yes without really knowing what the question was really about. My real answer would be no. |
|
| 08-12-2004 07:20 AM | ||
| wormpaul |
Still good to bring up ideas... It cant be always a full hit 
|
|
| 07-12-2004 10:44 PM | ||
| Fawfulhasfury |
oh, alright, I guess you're right. sorry. |
|
| 07-12-2004 10:42 PM | ||
| The Niles | Rating systems are different from country to country so it would be rather useless. | |
| This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. | ||
