Site Feedback

Well, there is an option for Emulated listed under platforms, so it kind of already does accommodate for piracy (at least in a sense).

I'm pretty sure there is also a plug & play option under platforms, but that brings up the question of: what do you consider to be "plug and play"? Actual plug-and-play consoles with original games? Should mini consoles with classic game compilations be treated separately? It's entirely up to Everdread on how to format this, but I do think it's important to at least consider.

Plus it still raises the question: now that the storefront feature exists at all, what do you put down if your platform of choice is a built-in/all-in-one platform? Is it physical due to it being a physical object? Or is it digital because all of the games on it are digital? It's just kind of a weird, blurry, grey area.

But most importantly, would it mean that the SNES Classic is technically an officially licensed physical copy of Star Fox 2?

My head hurts.

Very true, there is an option for Emulated, though that's mostly there AFAIK because people were putting down "PC" for console games :P And I'm not opposed to the idea BTW! Just discussing it :)

I think "plug & play" is any console that has games built-in. I don't see why it has to be "original" games. There are plenty of "plug & play" labeled products with pre-existing games. I had one with Pac-Man and a few others. There's no tangible distinction between them and "mini consoles" AFAIK aside from the latter specifically referring to the recent fad.

Again, I think "built-in" should be an option if only to bring peoples' collections consistent for those who choose to use the storefront organizer :) Where to put it? I don't care, or think it matters, but I'm inclined to say physical myself :)

As for your bolded question, I'd say it depends on the context whether it's relevantly true or false ;)

Very true, there is an option for Emulated, though that's mostly there AFAIK because people were putting down "PC" for console games :P And I'm not opposed to the idea BTW! Just discussing it :)

I think "plug & play" is any console that has games built-in. I don't see why it has to be "original" games. There are plenty of "plug & play" labeled products with pre-existing games. I had one with Pac-Man and a few others. There's no tangible distinction between them and "mini consoles" AFAIK aside from the latter specifically referring to the recent fad.

Again, I think "built-in" should be an option if only to bring peoples' collections consistent for those who choose to use the storefront organizer :) Where to put it? I don't care, or think it matters, but I'm inclined to say physical myself :)

As for your bolded question, I'd say it depends on the context whether it's relevantly true or false ;)

I'm just a meticulous SOB that wants everything to have a proper place and purpose, so if what I'm spewing out sounds WAAAAY too specific, then you're probably right 😅. I've seen many people argue about the mini consoles "not really being plug and play" so that's why I mention it. If you ask me? It's a console that you plug in and play without having to own a game separately. Literally, the only difference is that mini consoles don't have the controller hardwired to the console. So yeah it's kind of a stupid argument, but I've seen far more moronic arguments in my day, so it's really nothing new if you've been on the internet any time in the past 25 years.

Sidenote: I actually have a Pac-Man mini arcade plug-n-play too (this one, to be specific)!

Very true, there is an option for Emulated, though that's mostly there AFAIK because people were putting down "PC" for console games :P And I'm not opposed to the idea BTW! Just discussing it :)

I think "plug & play" is any console that has games built-in. I don't see why it has to be "original" games. There are plenty of "plug & play" labeled products with pre-existing games. I had one with Pac-Man and a few others. There's no tangible distinction between them and "mini consoles" AFAIK aside from the latter specifically referring to the recent fad.

Again, I think "built-in" should be an option if only to bring peoples' collections consistent for those who choose to use the storefront organizer :) Where to put it? I don't care, or think it matters, but I'm inclined to say physical myself :)

As for your bolded question, I'd say it depends on the context whether it's relevantly true or false ;)

If you want my honest opinion, I think the main reason why a lot of people make that argument in the first place (at least from what I've seen) is that a lot of people associate the term "Plug-n-Play" with cheap knock-offs and poorly made licensed games. A step above Tiger Electronics if you will. So, when an all-in-one console is released, loaded with a bunch of beloved classics, I think people might want to choose to dissociate them with other plug-n-plays. That's just what I interpreted from it all anyway. I'll end my side of this discussion for now so that this thread doesn't get too off topic.

Oh, you know what, one last idea for Everdread (for now). When you log a game as a Co-op playthrough, if the people you're playing with also have HLTB accounts, would it be feasible to link to their profiles/usernames under your submission (even if it's only visible to friends)? So like if you're currently playing through a co-op game, or you have a clan in an MMO, you could be like "I'm playing so-and-so with these guys! Go see what they're playing!". Or even just to see that it's labeled as "Co-op" when people look at your "Currently Playing" list on your profile. I'm no expert in coding, and I have not a single clue as to what kinds of sorcery it would hypothetically take for you to implement something like this (or any of the other things I suggested today), but I wanted to at least put my ideas out there while they're fresh in my mind.

Oh, you know what, one last idea for Everdread (for now). When you log a game as a Co-op playthrough, if the people you're playing with also have HLTB accounts, would it be feasible to link to their profiles/usernames under your submission (even if it's only visible to friends)? So like if you're currently playing through a co-op game, or you have a clan in an MMO, you could be like "I'm playing so-and-so with these guys! Go see what they're playing!". Or even just to see that it's labeled as "Co-op" when people look at your "Currently Playing" list on your profile. I'm no expert in coding, and I have not a single clue as to what kinds of sorcery it would hypothetically take for you to implement something like this (or any of the other things I suggested today), but I wanted to at least put my ideas out there while they're fresh in my mind.

When you log a game as a Co-op playthrough, if the people you're playing with also have HLTB accounts, would it be feasible to link to their profiles/usernames under your submission

I second this suggestion, as it would help cut down on the total submissions displayed on certain games. Currently, both players submit an identical run to the same game and can leave a comment stating who their co-op partner is, whereas with a condensed post on a co-op tab there wouldn't be so much filler.

Is the Estimate time for Steam profiles having a lot of games not getting fetched and I'm getting Error First Byte timeout 503.

Thank you for adding storefronts. Can you please add Apple Arcade to that? To me, "Apple App Store" are games I have purchased or downloaded for free and are now included in the purchased section of the App Store UI, while Apple Arcade games are downloaded and authenticated as part of a subscription service. Just like you have separate selections for PS Plus, PS Now and the PS Store, I would like to separate Apple Arcade and Apple App Store.

I think the intention is that whenever you put in your final time is when you completed it (assuming you put the time in the day you last played it).

Thank you for the explanation, that actually makes sense. I guess I was maybe over-thinking it.

Also I second this, I feel like it would be a neat addition if you could put down multiple dates for 1 completion. Like I beat Final Fantasy VII Remake back in December of 2020, but I don't plan on getting 100% until I get a PS5 so I can do it on Intergrade. So being able to have the option to put in one date for your main story, and then a separate date for when you complete it would be really helpful, especially when looking back and comparing the difference in time between the two (which could be a feature in it of itself!).

Your case with Final Fantasy VII Remake is kind of along the lines of what I was thinking in terms of having multiple dates being nice. There are a couple of games on my end where I completed the main game, but want to do a full completion playthrough later on. It's kind of a separate playthrough in a sense, but since it involves continuing off from previous progress, it makes more sense to keep it a part of the same playthrough.

Your case with Final Fantasy VII Remake is kind of along the lines of what I was thinking in terms of having multiple dates being nice. There are a couple of games on my end where I completed the main game, but want to do a full completion playthrough later on. It's kind of a separate playthrough in a sense, but since it involves continuing off from previous progress, it makes more sense to keep it a part of the same playthrough.

I do that a lot, and how I handle it is by using the date completed field for the date I first consider myself “done” with the game, and then when I come back later for side content I put the date I finished THAT in the notes for Main + Extras or Completionist (whichever applies).

Personally, I think that the Platform section should be half as large and the storefront choice should be where the red rectangle is.



I would also like if the chosen storefront would be displayed here besides the platform.

We're on the same wave length!

Both screenshots are next steps for me.

I put storefront in additional at first just to see how reception was and a way to publicly test the feature.

2nd screenshot is already coded and will be in next release.

New storefronts for Apple Arcade and Google Play Pass too.

We're on the same wave length!

Both screenshots are next steps for me.

I put storefront in additional at first just to see how reception was and a way to publicly test the feature.

2nd screenshot is already coded and will be in next release.

New storefronts for Apple Arcade and Google Play Pass too.

Just a suggestion:

Since you already have option groups to separate physical and digital "storefronts," maybe a third one for Subscription? I guess it just feels like there's a lot under Digital right now, and more coming.

Just a suggestion:

Since you already have option groups to separate physical and digital "storefronts," maybe a third one for Subscription? I guess it just feels like there's a lot under Digital right now, and more coming.

Would you consider Subscription-based games to be along the same line as rentals? I know it's not technically the same thing, it's more like you're renting a collection rather than a single game, but I'm just curious as to what people think. I'm pretty sure there's a rental option under physical storefronts, I don't remember if there's a digital counterpart.

Actually, looking at the list, there already are options for subscription-based game streaming services like Xbox Game Pass and PS Now. I think since these are still digital versions of the games, it should probably still fall under "digital". If there's a service that sends you physical games based on a subscription, then I am unaware of it.

Another suggestion for the storefront is an option for default games (games that come with the console like the Streetpass games and FaceRaiders for 3DS, or more recently, Astro's Playroom for PS5).

Alternatively (and just generally), like how under the Physical category there's an option to just put "physical", there should be an option under the Digital category for you to simply mark it as Digital, helpful for those cases where you can't properly categorize it otherwise.

P.S. Wii Shop Channel absolutely deserves an option, it's the only other Nintendo storefront that isn't already listed and I have a ton of WiiWare and Virtual Console games left on my backlog

Would you consider Subscription-based games to be along the same line as rentals? I know it's not technically the same thing, it's more like you're renting a collection rather than a single game, but I'm just curious as to what people think. I'm pretty sure there's a rental option under physical storefronts, I don't remember if there's a digital counterpart.

Actually, looking at the list, there already are options for subscription-based game streaming services like Xbox Game Pass and PS Now. I think since these are still digital versions of the games, it should probably still fall under "digital". If there's a service that sends you physical games based on a subscription, then I am unaware of it.

There are already subscriptions listed, yes. I'm just suggesting, since he uses option groups already, it might improve the UX to make a third one? Just a suggestion.

Just a suggestion:

Since you already have option groups to separate physical and digital "storefronts," maybe a third one for Subscription? I guess it just feels like there's a lot under Digital right now, and more coming.

+1 to this. Would clean up the list a bit, and I do think overall people view the ownership of a bought game a bit different from the ownership of a game through a subscription.

I do that a lot, and how I handle it is by using the date completed field for the date I first consider myself “done” with the game, and then when I come back later for side content I put the date I finished THAT in the notes for Main + Extras or Completionist (whichever applies).

That's a good approach actually. Thanks, I'll try doing it like that!

There are already subscriptions listed, yes. I'm just suggesting, since he uses option groups already, it might improve the UX to make a third one? Just a suggestion.

I think it's a good one.

Is there a glitch involving the Search options for systems? All my search options for systems, PC's or consoles to play on are now locked to "My Platforms", meaning I can't search on the main search function by systems I've never played on.

UPDATE: Just pulled up a separate tab and checked again and the issue has now disappeared; not sure what's going on, but glad its back to normal.

I'm confused about the PC VR platform tag that we have now. At least I think it was only added recently? Like a few weeks ago, maybe?

I see a lot of VR-only games be both tagged with the platform PC and the platform PC VR as two separate things. It even splits the times. Even though these are not two different versions of a game or anything like that.
What exactly is the point of that? It seems to just muddle the stats.
Or how exactly is it supposed to be used? Should we now remove the ordinary PC tag from all VR exclusive games?

Just to name one example: Superhot VR obviously is only playable in VR, no matter what platform. And yet there are two independent time pools for PC and PC VR. In this case, the same goes for PS4 and PS VR too.

I just want to know what the plan or thought process is here. Are you eventually going to whittle down all the VR-only games until they only have their respective VR platform tagged with a combined time pool? Or am I missing something and this actually has a practical reason?

- Matt

Site Update:

Submit
- Storefront moved up next to Platform selection

User Messages
- A "Top" and "Bottom" shortcut will appear on conversations with 10 or more replies.

User Playthroughs
- Storefront will appear next to platform on List/Box view.

New Platforms
- Apple Arcade
- Google Play Pass

I'm confused about the PC VR platform tag that we have now. At least I think it was only added recently? Like a few weeks ago, maybe?

I see a lot of VR-only games be both tagged with the platform PC and the platform PC VR as two separate things. It even splits the times. Even though these are not two different versions of a game or anything like that.
What exactly is the point of that? It seems to just muddle the stats.
Or how exactly is it supposed to be used? Should we now remove the ordinary PC tag from all VR exclusive games?

Just to name one example: Superhot VR obviously is only playable in VR, no matter what platform. And yet there are two independent time pools for PC and PC VR. In this case, the same goes for PS4 and PS VR too.

I just want to know what the plan or thought process is here. Are you eventually going to whittle down all the VR-only games until they only have their respective VR platform tagged with a combined time pool? Or am I missing something and this actually has a practical reason?

- Matt

The platform breakdown system just hasn't been updated to match the other platform system changes yet.

There are games that have a VR and Non-VR component like Resident Evil 7 so it still makes sense to break those platforms down by PS VR vs. PlayStation 4.

None of this should affect how you want to label your platforms for your playthroughs though. Continue to do that however you'd like.

Is the Estimate time for Steam profiles having a lot of games not getting fetched and I'm getting Error First Byte timeout 503.

I'm working on fixes for this and slightly overhauling the Steam imports page:

It will avoid bulk submits which is causing the timeout errors.

The platform breakdown system just hasn't been updated to match the other platform system changes yet.

There are games that have a VR and Non-VR component like Resident Evil 7 so it still makes sense to break those platforms down by PS VR vs. PlayStation 4.

None of this should affect how you want to label your platforms for your playthroughs though. Continue to do that however you'd like.

Of course I see how it makes sense for games that have both a VR and a non-VR version.

But the lack of consistency is what's confusing me and I can't exactly tell if that has a purpose or actually needs adjustment. As is, I'm unsure how I wanna use them.
If the platforms were actually applied consistently, I would distinguish between VR platform and non-VR platform for my logs. But since that's not actually the case and all VR games are tagged by default with both platforms, even if a non-VR version doesn't exist, it kinda defeats the purpose in my eyes.
And of course, splitting time pools when there aren't actually two versions of a game is just odd.

I guess my main question now is:
Do you want us to correct/edit VR-only games that are tagged with both platforms or do you want to keep both platforms on the games' pages regardless of it being VR-only or not because they will be combined with a future site update for example?

- Matt

Of course I see how it makes sense for games that have both a VR and a non-VR version.

But the lack of consistency is what's confusing me and I can't exactly tell if that has a purpose or actually needs adjustment. As is, I'm unsure how I wanna use them.
If the platforms were actually applied consistently, I would distinguish between VR platform and non-VR platform for my logs. But since that's not actually the case and all VR games are tagged by default with both platforms, even if a non-VR version doesn't exist, it kinda defeats the purpose in my eyes.
And of course, splitting time pools when there aren't actually two versions of a game is just odd.

I guess my main question now is:
Do you want us to correct/edit VR-only games that are tagged with both platforms or do you want to keep both platforms on the games' pages regardless of it being VR-only or not because they will be combined with a future site update for example?

- Matt

Maybe I'm not understanding what you are seeing.

You shouldn't see PC VR or PlayStation VR show up in the platform list by the game's description. If you see those, they need to be updated.

If you are referring to the platform breakdown, those are based on user's platforms that they set during playthrough submissions. Those should only appear if a user has played on one of those and set it.