A GameFAQs "classic" appearance has been promised, which means that it should be implimented within the next few months.
Printable View
A GameFAQs "classic" appearance has been promised, which means that it should be implimented within the next few months.
From a design standpoint, it's a step in the right direction--it doesn't look quite like a fansite anymore. I don't like GameSpot's streaming video ads (that have to load in the MediaPlayer plugin that Mozilla doesn't like, and plain look ugly). And that picture of Bethany or whatever...that's definitely the worst picture I have ever seen willingly posted on the Internet.
Depends on what you're looking for from a design.
re: webdesign, fuctionality should always be pairamount, so I think the new revision is a step in the wrong direction.
I'm talking more visual design. Again, it looks less like a fansite now, which I think is good. I never used the GameFaqs front page beyond the game search box, so I don't really know or care about the rest of the usability. Everything else seems to have the same usability with a different look that we'll have to get used to.
...Though I still think the site needs more effort put into the visual design. It looks less like a fansite now, but still looks like a fansite.
At least it looks better than Gamespot, though that's true of websites made by grade schoolers using AOL quick make web tool.
It is a fansite anyway, so why shouldn't it look like one?
Wow, the search feature is retarded. I tried to search for Future Tactics, and the results page listed every Back to the Future game, and every game with "tactics" in the title EXCEPT Future Tactics. Quotes and boolean operators didn't help either.
Works fine for me. It's right at the top.Quote:
Originally Posted by salmonax
Well, actually, GameFAQs ISN'T really a fansite right now, but that's beside the point. The site's layout is still easy to navigate, although now pretty much all of the content beyond the FAQs is a pain to read due to the small text being used.
Meh....it's ok.