Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Review my reviews

Recommended Posts

Hey guys! Some of you might have seen my first two official reviews posted in The /newstuff Chronicles this week! I had a lot of fun writing them and I hope you found them informative. If you don't recognize my reviews, they're the first two at the top of the article for this week.


Since these were the first reviews that I wrote specifically for The /newstuff Chronicles and I intend to write more as time goes on, I thought it would be a good idea to reach out to the community here and tell me what you thought about my review style. Were the reviews too wordy, too fast-paced, did you have a hard time following my train of thought? Maybe you thought they weren't funny or engaging enough. Whatever your comments may be, I love to write reviews like these and I would appreciate constructive criticism or other feedback to help me get better in the future. Thanks a lot and I hope I'll get to chat with you guys more soon!

Share this post

Link to post

When I saw the title, I was hoping it referred to reviews in the files database, including this one. I'm only bringing this one up because I think you can learn more from it than the /newstuff ones. The mistakes are: criticizing missing textures after playing with the wrong iwad (it says "Game : Doom" in the text file); generally finding nitpicky things to direct disproportionate levels of anger towards (a 'hot start' where a single monster is active -- well get ready to hate lots of stuff, because it can get a lot hotter); and calling a map with a total of 46 mostly low-tier monsters roaming around at low to moderate densities a slaughtermap, which in this case is not a useful characterization for anyone hoping to find or avoid slaughtermaps. If you go into 'Hatchet Job' mode, mistakes on your part will only be amplified. 


As for the newstuff reviews, your prose is decent. It's clear and literate, which is easily good enough for this. However, it seems like your focus could use work. Your review for 'The Blood Trials' starts off with a somewhat irrelevant aside on you and your source port history -- not too damning, because it's really short, but not interesting enough (just imo) to justify any space. Then it goes into a lot of specific details that I can't contextualize at all without having played the wad, thus would fit better at the end of the review, if anywhere at all. The last four paragraphs are a lot more relevant to me, but the review as a whole feels messy and rambly. The 'Trigger-Happy' review is a lot better. It is shorter and flows better. It tells me stuff about whether I'd be interested in the wad, and it focuses on general qualities and attributes before delving into specifics or more nuanced analysis. Many of the shorter reviews from this week's set are very efficient in their descriptiveness, and it's worth learning from them. 


Best of luck with future reviewing. 

Edited by rdwpa

Share this post

Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now