Talk:Pelit
 | Video games Low‑importance | |||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
 | Finland | ||||||
| |||||||
1942
I see you voted in a 1942 mod AFD vote. Well Finnwars is up for AFD again, and you may be interested in the List of Battlefield 1942 mods AFD. Bfelite 03:02, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
style
article reads like it's been created by staffers of pelit(very praising in style). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.197.70.210 (talk) 13:40, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Quality of the Magazine
The article doesn't seem to maintain a NPOV. "Recently the quality has decreased in some respect, as the magazine has started to extensively use screenshots from official press kits as opposed to their own screenshots of actual gameplay situations" is definitely a personal opinion. Is there a citable source for this information or is it "original research"? Either way, it should be changed or removed. (I'll remove the section in a couple days unless someone has good ideas about developing it) Pasi — Preceding undated comment added 17:59, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
As far as I know, Pelit tries to use it's own screenshots, press pictures are only used in situtations when that's not possible. Sinerma 09:52, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Change to article name
Pelit means in finnish "games" but article is about magazine named Pelit, so should this be renamed to Pelit_(magazine) or Pelit_(finnish magazine)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.253.209.251 (talk) 20:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- If something else ever has a greater need of this article's name. Disambiguating where there's no ambiguity is kind of pointless. --Kizor 10:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Someone could just add a link to the definition of 'pelit' in the Finnish Wiktionary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.77.203.218 (talk) 11:23, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Controversies
I'm in on some controversy. I came here because I was tired of seeing "Pelit (Finland)" consistently dole out the highest scores on Metacritic. I don't understand how it earned a reputation as a "serious" critic under Meta criteria. And...if I were to cast aspersions, I would say they're doing so to win publishers over: gamers go to Metacritic, gamers see high review from Pelit at the top, publishers continue to send review copies.
Just take a look http://www.metacritic.com/publication/pelit-finland?filter=games:
For 1,438 reviews, this publication has graded:80% higher than the average critic 4% same as the average critic 16% lower than the average critic
Compare to, say, IGN http://www.metacritic.com/publication/ign?filter=games:For 11,287 reviews, this publication has graded:60% higher than the average critic 7% same as the average critic 33% lower than the average critic
I smell conspiracy...
-- Darkhawk —Preceding undated comment added 17:18, 6 March 2012 (UTC).
So Pelit sometimes awards games with scores that significantly differ from Metacritic and Game Rankign averages. So what? I don't see how observations like this are relevant to this article. Please stop posting them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.237.40.156 (talk) 21:00, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yes exactly, so bloody what? Game magazines are free to rate games as they please, there's no official rule how they must be rated. For an even better example of a game magazine rating games differently than others, see Amiga Power. JIP | Talk 18:18, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
The observation may be relevant, as the magazine's founders wanted to make a gaming magazine which did not cater to the lowest common denominator and have a different approach to writing about and reviewing games. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.77.203.218 (talk) 11:41, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- So did Amiga Power. It's certainly not unique to Pelit, although I understand it's quite rare nonetheless. JIP | Talk 15:04, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Pelit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160611185430/http://www15.uta.fi/FAST/FIN/GEN/tt-games.html to http://www15.uta.fi/FAST/FIN/GEN/tt-games.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:29, 30 November 2017 (UTC)