Castle Paradox

[Eggie]

I wanna make reviews for so many games, but the thing is all of mine seem to be not full enough. I need help, pointers, to help me make a nice good review, because there are a couple of games I want to review. Please, hear my plee... I ... am... falling...

[MultiColoredWizard]

See http://www.castleparadox.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=229&start=0

[Eggie]

Wow... you have no life-

Ha! Just Kidding!

Thanks! Now I make a review so awesome, it'll cause CP to explode!

[Shadowiii]

Review length usually depends on:

1. The length of the game.
2. They style of the game
3. The "problems" or "achievements" the game has.

If a game flat-out sucks, then your review will probably not be very long.
If it is bad but needs improvement, it'll be decent length.
If its GOOD but needs improvement, it'll usually be really long.
If its a flat out rockin game, the review length tends to be random, depending on how much you ramble on about its greatness.

Of course, some games (Avalanche) don't even have battles, etc. So its a small review, but gets to the point.

Others, like FFH, are huge, amazing monsters with problems, thus resulting in a huge review.

Of course, stuff like Time Flies was kinda random length, because it really doesn't fall short anywhere (except LENGTH. Grr)

So basically, write everything you want too, but don't put in screenshots (so the review won't go up). Then write MORE the NEXT DAY. Then you should probably have a decent sized review.
_________________
But enough talk, have at you!

[Eggie]

Yeah. I had revies for TS1, TSSE, Blow Up (48 Hour), and Ecopia.

[Pepsi Ranger]

Hey Eggie,

I've been told that I'm not too bad with the review thing, so I thought I'd point you in the direction of a couple forgotten articles I wrote about the subject for Operation: OHR. Click on the old O:OHR site and search for the article archives. There's a couple articles called "Ethics of Evaluation (Parts 1 and 2)" that more or less outline my methods of reviewing.

Or if you'd rather just click them straight from here as most of you seem to prefer:

Part 1
http://www.castleparadox.com/archive/operationohr/article-eoe1.php

Part 2
http://www.castleparadox.com/archive/operationohr/article-eoe2.php

Unfortunately another OHR member was supposed to write Part 3, but he left the community while he was in the middle of writing it, and I sort of forgot about it after that, so it's not there. But I may go ahead and write the last part some day (depending on whether or not a really awful game inspires me to do it). But I think the first two parts alone should help you.

And just a few extra secrets to let you in on:

1. I write all my reviews in Microsoft Word before importing them into the CP review program (I saved the template ahead of time). This allows more flexibility for editing and proofreading.

2. I'm not a fan of stale reviews, so that's why I give all of mine that humor kick. Part 1 of EOE deals more with that subject.

3. I mess around with the games I review (like seeing if the character can walk through walls) to see if all the bugs have been dealt with. In other words, I playtest the games I review. This allows for more things to discuss and potentially alerts the creator of problems.

And one little thing that I'm still really bad about:

Get your facts straight. Even though I make sure that I get all my names right, I still drop the ball when it comes to reciting accurate technical info. For example, my Memoria review (from way back in the day) mentioned that it was retrofitted and rereleased with plotscripting. Royal later corrected me in the fact that it was the same game that had been in circulation for a couple years (unaltered). So I essentially made myself look DUM in the process. And just recently with the Bast*rd.GUNS review, I mentioned that the keypad numbers in the hero's spell list did nothing but deliver the same type of attack as a regular gunfight. Once again I was corrected and informed what the purpose of those numbers were for. I tried using them in the appropriate way and they worked. But alas I could not fix the mistake in my review since it had already been posted, so once again I looked like a moron.

The moral of the story is that it doesn't hurt to show your review to the creator before releasing it to CP to verify your info.

And just for the record, I used to do that with my O:OHR reviews. The author typically saw the review before the admins and community did (most of them anyway). It was more of a courtesy than a detail-check, but it all works the same.

And MCW is a prime example of how these methods work. I was very impressed with the review he wrote after he had "gotten it."

So with that I say good luck.
_________________
Progress Report:

The Adventures of Powerstick Man: Extended Edition

Currently Updating: General sweep of the game world and dialogue boxes. Adding extended maps.

Tightfloss Maiden

Currently Updating: Chapter 2