Page 3 of 7

OFFICIAL NEW SITE DESIGN THREAD

Posted: February 3rd, 2012, 10:43 am
by 0-Storm

Looks good. Seems more vibrant.


OFFICIAL NEW SITE DESIGN THREAD

Posted: February 3rd, 2012, 10:46 am
by PacMan000
[QUOTE]I have no problem with change, but for some reason the new design looks a little cheaper and more like any other plain ol' site than the old design did.  /QUOTE]

I agree, to an extent.   If you got rid of the starry background the site would look less cheap.  The background is cool, but it looks amateurish. 

OFFICIAL NEW SITE DESIGN THREAD

Posted: February 3rd, 2012, 10:49 am
by PacMan000
I noticed something else.  The link from the forum to the main page still links to the original site.  Is this just my problem; does anyone else notice this?

P.S. Sorry for the double post; the original site is still up, when will that go away?

OFFICIAL NEW SITE DESIGN THREAD

Posted: February 3rd, 2012, 12:55 pm
by Lucky Man

[QUOTE=Paul C]Looking at it again, I think what I am turned off by is the plain looking blue block dividers, when before you had the cool looking green tube border that neatly curved around everything, which looked alot more polished.
[/QUOTE]

Yes, I liked the curved green border much better. The new blue border is a little too bright.

OFFICIAL NEW SITE DESIGN THREAD

Posted: February 3rd, 2012, 2:00 pm
by Fingers dripping ink
I think it looks great. The colors of the Combatribes game pic really make it pop!

OFFICIAL NEW SITE DESIGN THREAD

Posted: February 3rd, 2012, 2:56 pm
by TheFour
I really like how the banners look with the new design....and that's pretty much all I like.  

This site now has a modern day Geocities look.

OFFICIAL NEW SITE DESIGN THREAD

Posted: February 3rd, 2012, 4:09 pm
by Leo1

Not sure how organizing by generation is better. It's 6 (Soon to be 7) categories compared to 4 (Soon to be 5) like it is now, hardly that significant of a difference. Plus, it would look odd not having a 1st generation category which is another mark against it. And who the heck knows off hand that the PSOne, for instance, is considered a a 5th generation console? Not many I wager while most all will know without giving it a second thought that it was released in the 1990's when they go looking for it.

[QUOTE=ShadowAngel]Well with this argument we could also say that the Genesis belongs in the 90's section as most people associate the console with the 90's and not the 80's [/QUOTE]

The Genesis was well established by 1990, having been released in Japan in 1988 and North America in 1989. So I don't think so. Now if the Genny had just been test marketed in 1989 with full release in 1990, I think you could use my argument in the way you just tried to.

The Intellivision first reached consumers in the 70's and went toe to toe against 70's consoles like the VCS and O2. It was viewed as part of the previous generation by people when the 5200, Vectrex, and Colecovision hit (Although people today sadly lump the two generations together rather than recognizing the significant leap that was made around 1982). Mattel was even gearing up to release a replacement to go up against things like the Colecovision when the crash destroyed those plans.

[QUOTE=ShadowAngel]
And i don't understand why so many people regard the 32X and Sega CD as stand-alone consoles, when in fact they were just add-ons. If they get their own sections, i guess the Jaguar CD should also get it's own section and if that get it's own section, the Neo Geo CD should also be stand-alone and i don't know in what chaos this will end. [/QUOTE]
The Sega CD and 32X represented a significant leap above what the standard Genesis hardware could do. They were more than just a different storage medium, which is all that the cd format for the Jaguar and NeoGeo were.

Plus, how many games did either ever recieve? The NeoGeo CD had perhaps a half dozen games that never saw cartridge release in AES or MVS form (With the rest being CD versions of cartridge games) and the Jaguar had about 10 commercial CD releases (With one of its bigger hitters later seeing a cartridge rerelease). Not much reason to segregate them off to their own section for organizational purposes when their libraries are almost mere footnotes for each system.


OFFICIAL NEW SITE DESIGN THREAD

Posted: February 3rd, 2012, 4:28 pm
by Fingers dripping ink
The new banners are pretty awesome. Gordon Freeman!

OFFICIAL NEW SITE DESIGN THREAD

Posted: February 3rd, 2012, 4:31 pm
by Fingers dripping ink
Sorry for the double post but using Leo's logic there should be a separate GameBoy Advance category. GameBoy Color? ...Maybe that too.

OFFICIAL NEW SITE DESIGN THREAD

Posted: February 3rd, 2012, 4:51 pm
by Leo1

[QUOTE=Fingers dripping ink]Sorry for the double post but using Leo's logic there should be a separate GameBoy Advance category. GameBoy Color? ...Maybe that too.
[/QUOTE]

I personally think a generic Game Boy section like he switched to with this redesign is more than adequate (I disagreed with labeling it as Game Boy Advance in the past when it also contained GBC reviews, something the Critic rectified with this redesign).

6 or 7 GBC reviews seems hardly worth the bother of providing it with its own dedicated section and doing it this way means that he has a ready made place to catalog Game Boy reviews if he ever tackles that platform.