I know this seems kind of ungrateful since people take a lot of time writing FAQs (and I really haven't written many), but maybe some will take it in the spirit of helpfulness rather than just pointless criticism. Feel free to add your own. I'm definitely not saying "OMG your faq sucks if you do this", this is more pointing out specific minor issues.

This is mostly based on RPG/S-RPG FAQs since that's the genre I play the most.

1. "This shouldn't be any problem."

This covers a wide variety of faults, but the basic idea is that the FAQ writer had no trouble with the boss/dungeon/puzzle and so doesn't even describe it in the walkthrough, just saying that the player shouldn't have any trouble. Sometimes this is because the FAQ writer is several levels ahead of standard players because they've been wandering around gathering data for the walkthrough.

2. Inadequate boss strategies

This includes recommendations to use glitches/cheats or bugs, "just level up and you'll beat him", "I don't really remember this guy but he was easy", and stuff like that. I think boss strategies are one of the most important parts of an RPG walkthrough and it's good to see writers spend some time on those descriptions.

3. Emoticons

Keep these in message board posts; walkthroughs don't need to be peppered with "XD" or ">_>;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;" or crap like that. One walkthrough I was using used "XP" all over the place and it took me a while to figure out that this was supposed to be an emoticon and not the abbreviation for experience points.

4. Misspellings of character/ability/etc. names

It's hard to search for specific information in a FAQ when the author misspells the names of the characters (especially if more than one spelling is used in the FAQ), weapons, abilities, and things like that. Most word processors will allow you to make custom dictionaries if the regular WP doesn't catch the words.

(The most annoying thing I have ever seen in a FAQ was a walkthrough, I forget which game, where the author had spelled "and" as "'n" (apostrophe n) in EVERY single instance of the word.)

Comments?

---
Cincinnati Bengals: 11-5, Next: Wild Card vs. Pittsburgh (1/8)
Indiana Hoosiers Basketball: 10-2 (Big Ten 0-2), Next: @Michigan State (1/11)

I agree with all, except partially #2. Some bosses in RPGs are really that hard that you should go a level up more. Not every boss can really be beaten with level 1 characters and stuff.
---
http://www.passthepotato.com/potato-1.php?potatoid=050715134719-600892
http://whatpulse.org/stats/teams/7664/ - GO KNICKS

It's very rare that levelling up is the only solution to defeating the boss. It does happen sometimes, but too many players are in the mindset where if they lose one time, that means the only recourse is levelling up.
---
Cincinnati Bengals: 11-5, Next: Wild Card vs. Pittsburgh (1/8)
Indiana Hoosiers Basketball: 10-2 (Big Ten 0-2), Next: @Michigan State (1/11)

1. "This shouldn't be any problem." AND 2. Inadequate boss strategies

My biggest irritation when consulting a FAQ - though it's not *always* the writer's fault - is when the one part I need help with is something they skip over. "Go north and you meet the boss. Once he is dead..." No, he is NOT dead. *I* am dead. That's why I came for help.

But unless a writer takes the time to try the boss several times (and with different approaches) he might not even realize that something can go wrong here. If he just managed to get through just fine on the first try, he might assume it's an easy fight. It's happened to me - the very first time I faced Jaffar in the original Prince of Persia, I killed him dead - then fell in a pit and died so I had to do the level over. After that I couldn't manage to kill him again until I'd gotten more practice in; I lost that game anyway.

I must say I am amused at the opposite in FAQs though, when a FAQ writer complains that a boss is "SUPER HARD" and I just waltzed over the guy. I was going through a Grandia 2 guide once just after finishing the game just to see what optionals I'd missed, and was amused by how the author was constantly complaining about how hard the final areas were. They were not.

3. Emoticons

I'll live, as long as they're not overused to the point that I have to search for text among the emoticons. Being used to a couple of people on my list who use emoticons fairly heavily (and being guilty of it myself if I'm in the mood), I'm not really bothered by them.

4. Misspellings of character/ability/etc. names

Mmm, I don't think I've ever had trouble finding something because of it...but if a writer constantly makes errors like these, or consistently misspells a name that appears in the game a lot, it raises questions about just how intensively he played the game while writing.


---
Post may contain traces of common sense.
http://www.mastagus.com/sash/collection/collection.html

For bosses, I'd like to see what strategy (or even better, strategies) the author would recommend. For an RPG boss, for instance, I'll need to know what he does, how I can best defend against it, what he's weak to, etc. I can work out that if I can't seem to beat him, a few more levels will probably work. I don't need a FAQ to tell me that. I *do* appreciate it if the FAQ tells me that this particular boss can actually be affected by Sleep or something, as that's something I'm not likely to have tried.

---
Post may contain traces of common sense.
http://www.mastagus.com/sash/collection/collection.html

But unless a writer takes the time to try the boss several times (and with different approaches) he might not even realize that something can go wrong here.

Yes, I agree with this -- for normal FAQs it's fine. But if someone is out to write the absolute best FAQ possible, it would be good for them to try the bosses several times, and to think about what might happen if they lacked certain abilities that they were relying on, or if they chose different characters, or didn't find every hidden bonus ability/weapon, etc. I would not recommend including (as the sole strategy) a strategy that hinges on a secret character, for instance.
---
Cincinnati Bengals: 11-5, Next: Wild Card vs. Pittsburgh (1/8)
Indiana Hoosiers Basketball: 10-2 (Big Ten 0-2), Next: @Michigan State (1/11)

Exactly. Now, I can understand a FAQ writer for an RPG not doing this very quickly; RPGs are messy affairs to write for to begin with, often stuffed so full of obscure side stuff that it takes ages to write a full guide before worrying about doing stuff several times in different ways.

But writing an ideal guide would require making a save at that obligatory save point just before the boss, fighting him, and then reloading even if you succeeded to try something else. And then painstakingly find out what spells affect him, what don't, what he has to throw at you, how it works out if you take the healer out of your party and bring in the archer instead...

---
Post may contain traces of common sense.
http://www.mastagus.com/sash/collection/collection.html

I completely agree with Sashanan on the bosses subject. I read an FAQ because I need help somewhere in a game. If I can't beat an RPG boss, I come to GameFAQ's for a strategy on how to beat him. I like to know that he can be poisoned, because I'd've thought it'd be a waste of time, etc. etc.

I simply do not find, "This boss is quite simple. All you need to do is attack. I didn't find him hard." I don't care if you didn't find it hard, I do.
---
The Drunken Contributor has Spoken...

Well, the harder the information is to find out, the more valuable its inclusion in a FAQ. Anyone can cast Scan on the boss and see his HP and resistances (and thus anyone can type that into a FAQ), but it takes some skill and thought to come up with good strategies.
---
Cincinnati Bengals: 11-5, Next: Wild Card vs. Pittsburgh (1/8)
Indiana Hoosiers Basketball: 10-2 (Big Ten 0-2), Next: @Michigan State (1/11)

And sometimes I'm surprised by what strategies people apparently do not know. For instance, it's been a while since I checked GameFAQs' Chrono Trigger FAQs, but the last time I did it didn't seem anybody had caught on to the fact that you can beat the annoying Twin Golems really rather easily without taking a single hit after their first one.

I'm no CT expert by any means but when I'd played the game through twice I'd figured out how to go about them. You'd think that a FAQ writer would do a lot more than just finish the game twice.

---
Post may contain traces of common sense.
http://www.mastagus.com/sash/collection/collection.html

Hey it's kern!
---
I can conceive of only one challenge for an omnipotent being --
the challenge of destroying himself - Scott Adams

"This shouldn't be any problem."

I agree, but sometimes it really isn't a problem. Like with Banjo-Tooie, there's the Chompasaur minigame:

Typically, I don't brag or say things like, "This is so easy, it's pathetic." As a FAQwriter, such a statement doesn't help anyone beat a game. But, I'm greatly inclined to say such a thing here. This game is so unbelievably easy. How easy? That sentence about the points was typed one-handed as I held the Z button down and the Control Stick to the right. I got 96 points by walking to the center of the arena and doing just that without even watching the screen.

In other words, you should have no problem beating this and gaining an easy Jiggy. If you're having problems, even when you just hold the stick and the Z-Button, I don't know what to tell ya.

Sometimes, a strategy is so simple that anyone should be able to theoretically beat it. So long as you say how that way is, I think you're in the clear.
---
No matter what they say, or what threats they make, or wars they start, always, always, always, MAKE 7UP YOURS!!

Obviously. No problem arises until a reader is stuck at a boss, and upon consulting the FAQ, finds it is no help whatsoever. Presumably in this case, nobody *would* get stuck. :)

---
Post may contain traces of common sense.
http://www.mastagus.com/sash/collection/collection.html

I personally don't think using things like XD or >.>;; is bad, but in limited amounts. It portrays what you are trying to express with your words, and sometimes thats difficult online. Also...sometimes a boss just makes you go >.>;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;.

I can name 3 off the top of my head.

As for the boss strategies >.> I agree...I'm obsessive about mine and making them not like that. But in some games, you really do need to spend time levelling up. Disgaea for example. No way you're going to be able to beat the ultimate boss in that game at level 1000. Or level 5000 for that matter. Go level some more, simple as that.
---
The Great and Powerful ~ChimeraDiete~
Currently Writing: Disgaea ~ Hour of Darkness

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

Totally agree with the above things, but MY pet peeve is organization.

The guide can have all the information in the world, but if I've got to Ctrl+F the name of the boss because there's no cross-index in the table of contents that allows me to quick search my way there... I mean, what if I don't know the name of the boss, as is the case in some games. That goes for subcategories, though- weapons, bosses, enemies, etc. Hell, even main locations (like towns in an RPG). A good table of contents is a NECESSITY for a good FAQ, and one that lacks it ticks me off because I've got to spend time filtering through the stuff that you couldn't sort for me.

Not to mention that I find it irritating to deal with a FAQ that doesn't use dividers.

I've heard the argument "I want to minimize KB for people with a dialup modem", but if you're trying to scroll through/navigate through a FAQ, either because they fudged up on the prior thing or because what you're looking for is specific enough that you went to the table of contents, cross referenced and quick searched and still have to scroll, it'd be nice to be able to quickly scroll and differentiate between sections. When I scroll past what I'm looking for by 5 miles more than once, there's a problem...
---
Q!

I personally don't think using things like XD or >.>;; is bad, but in limited amounts. It portrays what you are trying to express with your words, and sometimes thats difficult online. Also...sometimes a boss just makes you go >.>;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;.

I don't like to see those emoticons anywhere, but especially in a FAQ.

First off, I'm not sure what emotions XD and >.>;;;;;;;;;; are supposed to portray, so it's just meaningless. Plus, it makes you look like you're 10 years old. FAQs don't need emotion, they need useful information.
---
Cincinnati Bengals: 11-5, Get Well Carson Palmer
Indiana Hoosiers Basketball: 10-2 (Big Ten 0-2), Next: @Michigan State (1/11)

I've seen some perfectly intelligent, college graduee's use XD, >.>, :X, :O, :), etc. It by no means, to me, makes you look like you're 10 years old. I'm, sure that many people will think the same. It really only becomes filler space if there's a "XD!!" in every paragraph. Otherwise I think that its perfectly acceptable for a writer to give his or her opinion on a certain boss/area. I don't write about cutscenes so I wouldn't comment on them. I would much rather read a guide which uses these other one that curses like mad.

Also on the subject, what good is reading something without any humor? Personally, I would read a guide that I find entertaining rather than something really dull and boring any day. Granted, it needs to be tasteful (key word), since not everyone is from the same country, or understands the same types of jokes. But if they are funny, cute, or something along those lines I find it perfectly acceptable to make jokes and whatnot in your guides. According to you, that would be 'filler space' as well.

Note that I'm going to change your opinion in anything...internet debates never work. I'm just stating what I have learned from the hundreds of emails I have gotten over the years.

BOTTOM LINE: Guides are for information yes, but guides are also meant for readability.
---
The Great and Powerful ~ChimeraDiete~
Currently Writing: Disgaea ~ Hour of Darkness

Elyon pretty much took the words right out of my mouth.

---
#1 Peep | RIP Eddie Guerrero: 1967-2005
If at first you don't succeed, then lower your standards...

Indeed. One of the most common suggestions I get from readers is to add a little more personality.
---
I can conceive of only one challenge for an omnipotent being --
the challenge of destroying himself - Scott Adams

I find it laughable that anyone would even try to argue that >.>;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; improves readability of a guide.

:) and :( are fine, although I still wouldn't use them in guides -- those are much more standard than some of these other ones you see.
---
Cincinnati Bengals: 11-5, Get Well Carson Palmer
Indiana Hoosiers Basketball: 10-2 (Big Ten 0-2), Next: @Michigan State (1/11)

I'll use emoticons in the occasional email and bulletin board post, but never in a FAQ. It's like a comic who laughs at his own jokes--often, he's the only one laughing. If you can't convey humor without the emoticon, then you're not going to be able to convey it with the emoticon. I never use emoticons in my work, yet I most often get praised for my humorous and personable writing style (and, on one occasion, criticised for same).
---
'blog: www.sacredcowdiner.com
game guides: www.pyric.com

ah, but is it really akin to a comic who laughs at his own jokes, or to one who demonstrates inflection and enthusiasm in telling them? not everybody can be a Steven Wright.

I disagree, Papa. There are some things that you can not describe with words.

Example: The Red Prism Ranger. (You will know what game he is from if you have played it...)

You just can't tell someone about your facial expressions when you first see this boss. I believe it looks something like this:

-_-;

I know about 4 people who I showed the game to who actually made a face that looks quite a bit like that. Its a lot more fun for me, if I was reading a FAQ to have someone else know that others are feeling the same way and you're just not the only weird one who laughed at a semi-random joke.

As I stated above, they really shouldn't be used in excess, but I don't see anything wrong with using them. I don't really think of it as laughing at yourself because you are just emphasizing your point.

I don't actually use things like :), :(, :O, or >.> anymore in my FAQs, but I do show signs of disinterest or anger, such as -_-. I know what its like to be extremely annoyed at a video game. We've all been there. There are times, in certain video games (ever play BoFV? Even after beating it 10+ times I still get frustrated with that...) that you will get annoyed with. Its just showing that you emphasize with your reader. You know what they are going through, and you've been there yourself.

Of course, everyone is set in their own writing and beliefs and my opinions wont change anyone elses. I'd just like to state that^^
---
The Great and Powerful ~ChimeraDiete~
Currently Writing: Disgaea ~ Hour of Darkness

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

I don't use emoticons for jokes, I use it to either get the point across better or just to make things more fun/interesting to read. Sure, some can be obnoxiously annoying, but I use them scarcely. For example:

That's probably the nicest demon you'll ever meet. :P

or

Sorry for the long Table of Contents, but I wanted to make it as easy as possible for finding specific sections. :]

---
#1 Peep | RIP Eddie Guerrero: 1967-2005
If at first you don't succeed, then lower your standards...

I can't be positive, but I don't believe I've ever used an emoticon in my FAQs.

*checks*
---
Borrow money from pessimists -- they don't expect it back.

Okay so I used one in the version updates on my Legend of Zelda FAQ.

- Changed the top ASCII art because I didn't like it. >_>;
---
Borrow money from pessimists -- they don't expect it back.

That's probably the nicest demon you'll ever meet. :P

Sarcasm is inherent in that sentence, so the emoticon isn't necessary. I would also question sticking out one's tongue at one's readers, but, whatever...


Sorry for the long Table of Contents, but I wanted to make it as easy as possible for finding specific sections. :]

You shouldn't use first-person in a FAQ and you shouldn't apologize for anything in your FAQ, so why would such a sentence even be in a FAQ?

Would you put emoticons in an essay for literature class? A report turned into your boss? FAQs should be treated as professional documents and not have chatty Internet shorthand scattered throughout.
---
'blog: www.sacredcowdiner.com
game guides: www.pyric.com

You shouldn't use first-person in a FAQ

B - ****ing - S.
---
I can conceive of only one challenge for an omnipotent being --
the challenge of destroying himself - Scott Adams

Alex is correct. I switch in and out of first person for my boss strategies. Example:

---------
Mega Boss ASDF
HP:999,999

As expected, Mega Boss ASDF is going to be the hardest boss in the game. You can expect some extremely nasty attacks, and one hit kills on multiple characters per round. *goes on and on about damage*

While everyone's strategy for this boss will differ, I personally prefer... the revive-and leave them all at critical HP range. I have found that this strategy works in the multitude of times that I have beaten The dreaded ASDF
--------

While of course that was just made up right off the top of my head, it was just an example of something that I would possibly use. There's nothing wrong when referring to first person in that situation.
---
The Great and Powerful ~ChimeraDiete~
Currently Writing: Disgaea ~ Hour of Darkness

I'd love to write a walkthrough, but the chance of a reader actually being able to follow it and use it isn't expected to be very high, if only because I make sentences like this which use excessive phrases and I'm too lazy to go back and shorten them. I think I'm starting to understand why teachers hate grading my papers and give mine back after they've graded and returned everyone else's...
---
_,.,:;~'`'{.,::[\\=THE ONLY SB=//]::,.}'`'~;:,.,_
`'`':;-;,._:;`'`';:_.;~ArkticNight~;._:;'`'`;:_.,;-;:'`'`

There's no reason why you can't use first person in a FAQ. When describing a strategy, for instance, there's no problem putting "I chose character X and Y" and such. I personally find that better than the second-person command form some people use.
---
Cincinnati Bengals: 11-5, Get Well Carson Palmer
Indiana Hoosiers Basketball: 10-2 (Big Ten 0-2), Next: @Michigan State (1/11)

During walkthrough section writing in details about what happens in the game's cutscenes (character will say that he needs to go do this and that), or dissecting the story in every was possible.

I don't need to read the story, I need to know how to progress at particular point.
---
Now playing:
Atelier Iris: Eternal Mana; Dragon Quest 8

Even if a FAQ writer is able to beat a boss easily on his or her first try, that's still no excuse for being lazy. They can still take the effort to describe in detail the strategy they used, and then they'd at least have one strategy that they know can result in success. It may not be as good as having multiple strategies, but it's better than nothing.

So, yeah, inadequate boss strategies really bother me as well. It's bad enough when I'm able to easily come up with a strategy far better than any in a game's FAQs, but it's far worse when there isn't much of a strategy at all to begin with.

As for emoticons, I use them here and there. We're not typing up the results for some scientist research here. Games are about having fun, and guides exist to assist with that. If a guide can't be casual and fun (as long as it still remains useful), then what the heck's the point?
---
"I am sexy minority. OH! NO! I wanna be a sexy terminator. Sexy will never die. AH~~~~~!"

People who seriously nitpick FAQs always grinds my gears.
---
Psycho Penguin rules! SHABBA!

All this stuff about omg wtf all serious no emoticons no humour no personality bites.

Nearly every one of the dozens of guide e-mails I get weekly mentions how much they love the personality in my guides. And yes, my guides are filled full of emoticons, jokes, cut-scene dissection, sarcasm, and shock-horror - first person pronouns. Who the **** invented the rule of not using first person pronouns? I'm walking someone through a game. Look, I used another one in the previous sentence. Dude. It's ridiculous. Some people really need to lighten up.

ps. Cyril - love the Red Prism Ranger example. -_-; suits exactly.
---
Old loves, they die hard... Old lies, they die harder
o.O Push button to turn on. Play with button to drive wild...

My biggest pet peeve is probably commentating on a game's plot and cutscenes. Firstly it's spoilers, and it's filler.
---
32/42 Full Circle | Y.T.W.S.R. |
The FAQer Profiles and History - http://homepages.tesco.net/vicky.reynolds1

Over time, people have criticized my using first person in my guides. In my opinion, when I'm reading a guide, I want to see it from the author's point of view, and see how they did/attacked a certain situation in a difficult part of the game. Putting guides in third person can make them a little boring, and I like to keep mine in first person most of the time.
---
BostonFuse51 | FAQs Contributed: 10 (1197 KB)
Complete FAQs: 8

You shouldn't use first-person in a FAQ and you shouldn't apologize for anything in your FAQ, so why would such a sentence even be in a FAQ?

Would you put emoticons in an essay for literature class? A report turned into your boss? FAQs should be treated as professional documents and not have chatty Internet shorthand scattered throughout.

I understand about being unapologetic, in the sense that the FAQ is what it is and should not be ashamed of itself. That part I get.

One difference is that a FAQ is NOT being turned in as an essay for a literature class, nor for a boss. So, the same rules don't apply.

It's like saying:

"Well, you're going 200 miles an hour; would you do that on the highway?"
"No, because I'm on a racetrack."

A FAQ is a free document that can be written with whatever professionality they want, so long as it is useful. All it needs to be useful is CLEAR; everything else is secondary.

And the part about "you shouldn't use first person in a FAQ," as AIex said, that's just baloney. I am a gamer playing a game, and I am also writing about how I beat the game and how someone else can beat the game doing what I did. I'm not gonna turn it into an autobiography, but I see no reason to take myself out of the equation at some meaningless grasp at "professionality."

A FAQ could be done that way, but it could easily turn impersonal and cold. Instructing someone how to play the game without telling the first-hand experience is like the notes without the music.
---
No matter what they say, or what threats they make, or wars they start, always, always, always, MAKE 7UP YOURS!!

I wouldn't go so far as to call first person necessary, and we're getting dangerously close to changing the statement from "You CAN use first person" to "You SHOULD use first person", because that's not true- both are equally acceptable, and there are certainly audiences to both styles of writing. Neither one is right over the other, and neither one is wrong.

Just make sure not to fuzz that line- there's a big difference between what is OK and what is required.
---
Q!

Storyline discussion, in my opinion, is okay as long as it doesn't overwhelm the text. I've read through guides where I literally have to scroll down through many different pages, where the guide is quoting the dialogue exactly, also putting the script inside the guide, and it overwhelms the gameplay discussion. It's pure disorganization if you're really detailed about the story but not the gameplay, but fortunately this really only applies to one genre: RPGs.

An absolute necessity for a guide, in my opinion, is humor. I echo everything that Cyril said; I couldn't care less if I have to scroll down a little bit because of the occasional joke, emoticon, comment, etc. that's put into the guide. Most would argue that "FAQs are meant to walk you through the game, that's all the reader wants", and that's a very respectable argument. However, I find it easier to digest, much more entertaining to read, and in the end more identifying to have personality in a guide. I try and include quite a bit, and my readers all enjoy it. Not ONCE have I gotten a complaint in an e-mail about the personality that I put in my guides, but I very frequently get e-mails telling me that my guides are good because they aren't dry, drab, and dull.

So as long as you can get through the game and don't need to surf through walls of text to find information, humor is perfectly acceptable, as well as recommended, in my opinion. I also have no problem with, as an example, stating at the beginning of a boss strategy that "this boss is extremely easy" or "this is by far the hardest boss in the entire game", because that'll give me a good idea of how good the writer is, and warn me beforehand how hard I need to prepare.

And with that, there's no problem with emoticons either as long as they aren't used in excess or really dumb ways.
---
Woof. Visit board 571756.
#32454 ;; FAQs: 32 - 5650KB ;; I.W.W.H.T.Q.

I get into the habit if using a table of contents. As kirbix says, I found out that you should use a ToC, because I have read guides and got lost, so i read another guide and try not to get lost. Because i start a section, I make sure it is ToC friendly. Spelling might be a problem and the one or two emotes but that is about it.
---
Lois: Peter is it safe to be firing real guns at each other in the house?
Peter: Alright alright, nobody fire at Lois, she's scared. - Family Guy

People who seriously nitpick FAQs always grinds my gears.

I don't think it's really nitpicking; I didn't point out any specific FAQs by name. Just suggestions for anyone who cares.
---
Indiana Hoosiers Basketball: 12-4 (Big Ten 4-2), Next: Minnesota (1/29)
Cincinnati Bengals: 11-5, Get Well Carson Palmer

I agree with Kern's points.

I also don't like it when there's no easy navigation. (ctrl + f)

---
Zub Zub

Some of the best FAQs I've used are the ones that tell me exactly what to do. Whenever I play through a game like Pokemon, for example, and I finish it, I always enjoy starting the game over, but using an FAQ the whole way. I pick out one that tells me what Pokemon to catch at what time, what I should level them up to, what attacks I should keep, etc. and then play the whole game that way. Maybe it's just me, and I'm some weirdo for it, but I do enjoy playing a game differently the second time through.

So I guess that point I'm trying to make, is that FAQs shouldn't be vague. Sometimes it's good to be vague (I guess), but there's nothing wrong with naming out specifics that the reader should do.

---
CHARGERS 9-7 || 3rd in AFC West || 12/31: 23-7 loss to Denver
PADRES Change is good.

A few users that posted in this topic would probably shoot me down if they read my guides.

On another note, it looks like my style's similar to Karpah's, just that I have a long way to go before mastering the English language >_>.
---
Minstrel in the Gallery

Wow... yeah, I probably WOULD shoot you if I met you.
---
Q!

You shouldn't use first-person in a FAQ and you shouldn't apologize for anything in your FAQ, so why would such a sentence even be in a FAQ?

Yeah, right. FAQs are not novels. They're not supposed to be deadlocked into a particular narrative voice. And I've apologized a couple times for not having information readily available, or being late on an update. It happens.

My pet peeve? Describing current events in the game, discussing the storyline, basically anything that gives away what's going on. I hate that. If I'm scrolling through a FAQ and my eyes wander, I don't want to see that [insert character here] is going to die in the next scene, or turn evil, or become a pumpkin, or whatever. I just want to know what I need to know.
---
...this should be moderated for something, but hell if I can figure out what. - Fencedude
I swear to god I'm an atheist. - InvalidUser