The /newstuff Chronicles #322

Ah ok. It wasn't even a good screenshot anyways. It just shows the last map in "Qrumpi Old Men" featuring 10,000 imps and some cyberdemons standing right next to the platform you start on.

Painkiller mod ftw. Still needs a custom statusbar or RESIZED HUD ITEM SPRITES as neither zdoom or gzdoom (latest svn) is scaling them.

deathz0r said:

Wow, you guys put too much effort into reviewing WADs

That's because instead of one person doing 10 wads, it's 10 people doing 1 wad (or something like that).

Mancubus II said:

That's because instead of one person doing 10 wads, it's 10 people doing 1 wad (or something like that).

That sounds like an idea!

Why not. We could give T/nC it's own forum - branching off from Fan Fics - and run it along the lines of a community mapping project, with multiple submissions for each wad and a hand-picked team of seasoned writers to judge the submissions and polish the winning entries prior to publication. There could be competitions - speed-reviewing, 1024 character limit, co-op reviews (reviewers alternate in writing sentences) and for the readers a "match the review to the wad" contest.

Nice joke, GreyGhost, it almost reads like you're serious :p

In keeping with Doomworld forum protocol - the post concludes with an implied smiley. :P

GreyGhost said:

Why not. We could give T/nC it's own forum - branching off from Fan Fics - and run it along the lines of a community mapping project, with multiple submissions for each wad and a hand-picked team of seasoned writers to judge the submissions and polish the winning entries prior to publication. There could be competitions - speed-reviewing, 1024 character limit, co-op reviews (reviewers alternate in writing sentences) and for the readers a "match the review to the wad" contest.

Hehe, surely it can be done that way, or just doing it like they are doing it on skulltag forums now

:P

Oh, I see I'm going to have to think of a way to reply to the deathzor fan club that won't get delteted.

How about this one for size:

"Hhehe yes, he was pretty good :P but his motivation did not match his many obvious skills. JHEHhee".

myk said:

Personally I tend to post more comments on the database than here, as those stick to the WAD download page, while comments here aren't linked so directly. It's also kind of fun to rate the WADs.

Comments on WADs are even better with names, better than JohnDoe#1 JohnDoe#2 JohnDoe#3 JohnDoe#4... and also a proud of courage :D

Bloodshedder said:

One of imageshack's servers was not responding when I compiled the reviews. Two screenshots in all were not included.

Can you please remove HOKUTO ones ? They are total mess due to I suppose the mix between Doom and Doom2, levels looks normally radically different as their textures had been reviewed.

Also does Linguica check e-mails ?... No reply yet to change some "-" positions on description.

Many thanks for your assistance.

iceman57 said:

Comments on WADs are even better with names, better than JohnDoe#1 JohnDoe#2 JohnDoe#3 JohnDoe#4... and also a proud of courage :D

I don't agree. People accept other people's opinion more/less based on who it's coming from. If they don't know who it's coming from, they can only base it off of the opinion itself and how it was formulated.

So not being able to tell whether an opinion is from a known idiot or a known intelligent person (or a known vanilla fan trashing an enhanced source port WAD) is helpful?

Sorry, but that doesn't make any sense. I think that knowing the person writing the review is as important as the review itself.

It's the same with movie reviews. I generally tend to dismiss reviews by those elitist people who only seem to like arthouse fare so knowing where a reviewer stands has a large influence on the opinion being posted.

If the comment itself is helpful, it shouldn't matter who wrote it.

Graf Zahl said:
So not being able to tell [intelligence or bias] is helpful?

If you're intelligent yourself, you can tell enough, unless they aren't giving enough information to back their opinion... which makes their written opinion less relevant. People who actively try to hide their nature end up diluting or limiting their message.

There's no need to take kristus' point as a black and white matter. One can easily acknowledge that anonymity has the advantage of eliminating part of the reader's prejudice (which is part of this "knowing the reviewer"). In addition of course to making it much easier to post a comment, as you don't have to sign in and don't need to feel compromised through a defined identity. If there's something good about it, it's a valid option. If you force registration, the option does not exist. You can still sign comments in the database, and any reader who really doesn't like or trust anonymous comments can even ignore them.