Note that part of what does clog the list is precisely niche WADs. But it's easier to see you can't play a CTF WAD than a "normal WAD that has slightly different monster placement and architecture... and 'doomgod' difficulty."
That 's not a summary, but it could be the interpretation of someone with an extremely flaccid reading comprehension. If the difficulty is impossible for the reviewer, it's simply not going to be a good review for the people that can actually play the level, unless you find some other way to judge playability. Another option could be to ask a more skilled friend who played it for some info on game play, and improve the review with that.
So in summary, before anyone else reviews a wad for Newstuff Chronicles, you must watch the official demos, or else your review is null and void.
The difficulty aspect was covered in its own way, but "slaughter fan" refers more to liking and knowing about slaughter maps and what slaughter fans are into.
The most negative criticisms FMV directs at the wad had nothing to do with difficulty.
Two people can say "the WAD is a mixed bag" and completely disagree on the reasons why. Perhaps their "rating" would be equal, but that's not what we're arguing about.
Furthermore, even people on the slaughter side are agreeing, in this very thread, that the wad is a mixed bag. So essentially FMV accurately reviewed SF2011,
It's called hyperbole. You use a stronger image to highlight or mock what was already implied. Butthurt is a derisive term that means feeling dramatically offended by something, especially when it's expressed with whining and the like.
I'll ignore you taking "butthurt" literally
While occasionally friendly, the term fanboy is widely used to disqualify people by making them look biased and niche-dependent precisely against a supposed norm. The discrimination is heightened by the additional "butthurt" and the fact you're presenting an either/or proposition. In practice, the complaint by "slaughter fans" was simply that their appetites weren't addressed by the review, irrespective of anything said that may appease others. You can have both unless, perhaps, you think the niche guys are worthless.
which is the only thing I take exception to in that response - I'm using "fanboys" more as a classification than a derogatory term.
Again, it's proper for the slaughter fan which was complaining, although covering all the key bases you avoid valid complaints. I explained how to cover multiple views and to add depth where required at the end of my last post, versus a "point-of-view" comment where "type 5" reviews as such for whoever sees things the same way or something that's only generic.
The reliance on demos for a "proper" review just further polarises this discussion into two irreconcilable sides,
What was said is that you may need to be familiar with the niche to transmit a review of any use to those in that part of the community.
then saying you need to be part of a not-necessarily-related niche of the Doom community to truly appreciate it if you can't beat the whole thing legitimately,
They can, but complaints may arrive, unless they just make a comment on the database or the comments thread. "Being able to pick it up and give an opinion" means just that, not that others have to shut up when someone does it.
whilst I'm still advocating that anybody should be able to pick it up and give their opinion,
The best way to agree to disagree is to see how different viewpoints, or their best aspects, can coexist, like when you make a review that addresses both a general audience and any corresponding niche.
I'm tempted to just agree to disagree now that the heat of the argument has died down, to be honest.
You mention two things, but the review that does address slaughter fans would pay special attention to the "slightly different rules." Even if defined that way, slight rule changes can make a big difference. I mean, you start with generic comments, and then end up with some judgments that will mostly be relevant to speed runners and slaughter fans, for instance, which would likely want to pay attention to this WAD.
It's basically a normal wad with lots more monsters and slightly different rules for item placement and architecture.
This one may be the first to openly exploit the "genre" as an objective. Historically, the WAD can be seen as a community attempt to experiment and examine what makes a "slaughter level" in practice. See, this is the kind of questioning and thinking that would have somehow been present in a good review, aside from more practical playability considerations.
but you can say fully dedicated slaughter megawads are a fairly recent trend.
Wait, don't forget browsing the forums for every discussion about slaughter maps ever posted, and interviews by PM to all the possible slaughter fans and gods!
And no, studying the mod and its development history and watching its demo collection on the DSDA is really, really overkill for a t/nC review.
We were talking about an alternative to fullmetalvaran33's review, which has like a dozen paragraphs. Holding on to a review for a very long time is an annoyance, but claims can easily be extended by clicking on relinquish and then claim, if one needs more time.
Not for something that's supposed to be between one and three paragraphs, in the middle of a dozen other reviews, which have to be written within a day or two of claiming the slot.
They're reviews, not just recommendations for users. Aside from new players, those who already played the WAD, designers and testers also stop by to check what's going to be said about the WAD, which adds reasons to imply more than just "you should/shouldn't download this," advice those people don't need. We're all more or less "expert reviewers" here, anyway, potentially adding our take here or on the database.
These reviews are meant to be quickly read and summarize what's new.
Lastly, even if we can't and shouldn't expect reviews to become perfect, I'm posting these comments because I find the debate refreshing and I like it, not out of necessity.
It happens often. Gez just said it won't happen every time, which is obvious and irrelevant. It didn't happen this time, hence we complained to encourage it to happen more, and we even gave tips on how to make it happen. Your response is more or less "take back your critique!" Fuck that. Another way of putting it is, "you guys complained about something but next time we will do everything the same way."
End of that day, that isn't ever going to happen on any kind of reliable basis in /newstuff, for reasons I and Gez have already said
There are other possible replies without feeling forced to anything or losing pride, like "okay, slaughter guys, thanks for the input, complaints and concerns, we'll see if we make any use of them next time a niche WAD shows up!"