cardician

See, these are the kinds of things that really need official clarification. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one wondering this. Does anyone know the best way to get official clarification on something? Do I need to PM a specific someone, or just hope that a web design staff member eventually sees this and clears it up?

As for aliases, I thought of that but we're not able to edit the alias field as that's more for internal database use as I understand it.

I'm not clear on this and was hoping someone could clear it up for me. How are original games handled versus remakes? For instance, I notice there is a Space Quest: The Sarien Encounter page and there is also a Space Quest I: Roger Wilco in the Sarien Encounter page. Now these are technically the same game, but one is a remake done in VGA and updated in a few other ways. There are a few other instances of the old Sierra games where this is the case, some of the originals were redone in VGA and updated in some other ways, but there are not always seperate game pages for these other games. I'm just curious what the policy should be here. Should a remake have its own page, or should it be combined with what is technically the same game? Anyone have any idea? Or should I PM a specific person with this question? Thanks.

You'd think. Yet for the early games I can't find anything but year released. I've done a decent amount of googling and no one mentions anywhere full release dates for the disk versions of these games. Now I've found release dates for later versions of some of them, but I don't know if it would be alright to put those in. It's a release date of a version of the game, just not the original release date of the first edition of the game.

Ok, I now understand in looking around more that the game has to have a full release date for reviews to be available. Month, date, and year. Does this make sense though? Some of the older PC games I can't seem to find exact dates of release for, just years, and therefore absolutely no one can add a review to it. Seems like maybe something to think about.  For games whose exact release dates can't be found, should just the year be enough? What if you have the dates of release for some version of the game but not the original floppy disk verson? Things like that would be nice to have clarified, if someone can. Thanks.

Ah, I see. Thank you much. Makes perfect sense actually.

Though, in checking a game, take Secret of Monkey Island for instance, it does have a year of release. Does the date need to be a full date for the review section to kick in?

I was going to try to write up a review for some older PC adventure games that don't have any reviews yet, but I can't find any place to actually add them. They don't have a review section on the left and no where else can I find a place to add a review. Am I missing something? Can reviews not be added by lowly people like me until others have done so? Can reviews not be added to games that are a certain age?

First, its Enhanced edition, just to be clear.

Second, yes its censored. The Steam version, retail version, whatever you buy in North America is censored. The cards have the ladies breasts covered up and the in game models that showed breasts are also covered up. For example, in the swamp there is a wood nymph or something and she now has hair covering her nipple pixels.

Absolutely retarded that this country is so ridiculously stupid about nudity censorship when crazy over the top violence is totally acceptable, but that's how it is. I totally understand importing it, as I despise censorship, but in this case I didn't worry about it and just got the Steam version.

Personally, in Firefox 3.0.3, I'm receiving a bug where I can't really use tables in a guide. If I add a guide to a section and then hit delete anywhere in the guide, say when trying to delete some text, the entire table disappears. Very very very frustrating.