My DOOM Reviews

[doomaddict]

These ones do have new weapon sounds and a few new graphics, but they shouldn't cause a problem (I gave the Lord of the Cyberdemon a 10/10 rating because I enjoyed it, I was frightened that the Cyberdemons could come and strike anywhere, anytime).


Currently in Review: ACTION DOOM!

[doomaddict]

ANNOUNCEMENT: DOOMADDICT HAS FINISHED REVIEWING ACTION DOOM. THE REVIEW WILL BE POSTED. FEEL FREE TO PRAISE, CRITISIZE, OR DO WHATEVER YOU WANT WITH THE REVIEW AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T END UP HURTING OR KILLING SOMEONE.


Here it is folks, ACTION DOOM!



#12-Action DOOM

Filename:action
Author:"Scuba" Steve Browning
Purpose:Kill everything without being hit by any enemy fire.
Monster Count: Level 1-219 monsters Level 2-2395 monsters Level 3-244 monsters Level 4-0 monsters Level 5-1 monster
New sound:Yes (almost all replaced)
New monsters:Yes (almost all replaced)
New graphics:Yes (almost all replaced)
Gameplay:10/10
Difficulty:10/10 (one hit and you are dead)
Cyberdemon or Spiderdemon:1 BOSS on levels 1, 2, and 3
Words:
Size of levels:Level 1-Medium Level 2-Medium/Large Level 3-Medium/Large Level 4-Small Level 5-Small
Icon of Sin:No
Type:City, Space, Tech, Hellish, Udnerground,
Was wad worthy of playing:Yes

MINIGAMES, NEW WEAPONS,


Mods, sorry for double posting, but this review is an important one.

[Bloodshedder]

THAT is a REVIEW?

[Sharessa]

Aces!

But also, spades!

[doomaddict]

Bloodshedder said:

THAT is a REVIEW?

It's a review.

Reason my descriptions are as brief as they are is because I do not believe in spoiling the surprise too much. If I got more descriptive, I might spoil the surprise and ruin the fun. So, that is what I consider a "review".


I gave an extremely brief descripion of the levels, my ratings, and most importantly, whether the wad was worth playing or not.

[Vile]

I think you should reconsider the kind of reviews you write. You could describe the quality of the architecture and the gameplay without giving away too many specifics or surprises the players will encounter in the map. Also, you didn't really eliminate the spoilers, you just compressed them by describing the kinds of areas the wad consists of, as well as what bosses the player will encounter. These things are unnecessary when describing the quality of the wad itself.

Oh yeah, and telling us what's in the secrets is also spoiling it. :)

[Darkman 4]

Bloodshedder said:

THAT is a REVIEW?

[doomaddict]

A basic review to me consists of:


A. Name of Wad
B. Author
C. VERY, VERY Brief description
D. Gameplay Ratings
E. Difficulty Ratings
F. Was wad worth playing (aka. Overall Rating)
G. Other

Does not have to be in that specific order.


I might remove the monster count because some people might not want to know how many monsters are really in the level.

Finally, I do not have the biggest of the biggest spoilers, screenshots :)

[Darkman 4]

When people read reviews, they usually expect spoilers. Plus crap like "How many Cyberdemons and SMMs there are" are worthless. People don't play maps because there are a ton of them in there.

[Linguica]

That's the stupidest "review" I have ever seen. Quit while you're ahead.

[Nanami]

Hey guys, I had this idea to review all the wads in the archives.

Here's a sample review:

WAD NAME: void.wad
AUTHOR: Cyb
PORT: ZDoom
DID I LIKE IT: yes

What do you think?

[chilvence]

<3

[Darkman 4]

Excellent review, Nanami. 5 stars.

[manjar]

doomaddict said:

#12-Action DOOM

Filename:action
Author:"Scuba" Steve Browning
Purpose:Kill everything without being hit by any enemy fire.
Monster Count: Level 1-219 monsters Level 2-2395 monsters Level 3-244 monsters Level 4-0 monsters Level 5-1 monster
New sound:Yes (almost all replaced)
New monsters:Yes (almost all replaced)
New graphics:Yes (almost all replaced)
Gameplay:10/10
Difficulty:10/10 (one hit and you are dead)
Cyberdemon or Spiderdemon:1 BOSS on levels 1, 2, and 3
Words:
Size of levels:Level 1-Medium Level 2-Medium/Large Level 3-Medium/Large Level 4-Small Level 5-Small
Icon of Sin:No
Type:City, Space, Tech, Hellish, Udnerground,
Was wad worthy of playing:Yes

MINIGAMES, NEW WEAPONS,

That's a goddamn analysis, not a review. Anyone who actually is a reviewer does not write an entire review as a whole bunch of statistics.

Here's some sound advice: Leave it to people who know how to write a review, regardless of their opinion of a WAD.

[Grazza]

Linguica said:

That's the stupidest "review" I have ever seen.

Surely deathz0r must have topped that at some point?

Anyway, I spotted a fantastic list of reviews of all the wads in the archive. It gives all the information you could ever want: the date, filesize and location. And it's constantly updated. It's great! Here it is.

[Amaster]

Bahahaha. Even the text files that come with the wads are more descriptive than that.

[doomaddict]

Well, I put a small amount of spoilers, (like brief description). The point of my review is be able to describe the level in a BRIEF setting that won't take out too much fun.


Remember, if a review gives too many spoilers, then the wad won't be fun anymore.


P.S. I must keep my promise. I must never give up. Hence I like my title.

[Mogul]

True. That brings up a point. Most wads probably contain doomaddict's info in their own readmes. doomaddict - think about making more descriptive reviews. Or something.

[188DarkRevived]

Dude, just keep on going if you see it as such an enjoyable hobby.
And, by all means, don't forget to look at my WAD which appeared in /TNSC #180 in May of 2004. Please :)

[manjar]

doomaddict said:

Well, I put a small amount of spoilers, (like brief description). The point of my review is be able to describe the level in a BRIEF setting that won't take out too much fun.


Remember, if a review gives too many spoilers, then the wad won't be fun anymore.

Are you a tool or something? You posted a list of bosses in Action Doom, yet you just posted about how giving away too many spoilers degrades the fun factor? Man, you're worse than AndrewB, and all he did was pretty much describe the WADs.

[doomaddict]

whos AndrewB?

Also, I listed that there ARE bosses in some levels, but nothing about the bosses at all.

P.S. This is my way of playing every wad out there.

[Amaster]

Part of what's missing from the review is telling us WHY you liked it. That's probably the most important part of a review.

Also, make sure to post here each tmie you write a new review, so we know you're making progress. Better yet, start a new thread for each review.

[manjar]

doomaddict said:

whos AndrewB?

First person to write up /newstuff reviews on a regular basis.

Also, I listed that there ARE bosses in some levels, but nothing about the bosses at all.

You listed that there are bosses in particular levels. That IS a spoiler, not to mention it also ruins the element of surprise, that some idiot who had read you review actually knows that there is a boss somewhere in the level(s) that you mentioned.

P.S. This is my way of playing every wad out there.

I wish you insanity. Start with origwad and work your way from there. I dare you.

Amaster said:

Also, make sure to post here each tmie you write a new review, so we know you're making progress. Better yet, start a new thread for each review.

Yeah, he's bound to get the attention of at least someone if he does that.

[Mogul]

Right, even a sentence or two describing what you liked/disliked would help some.

[doomaddict]

DOOMADDICT'S NEW REVIEW:


Well, I will change the the style a little, making it pure 100% spoiler (but will make the title not spoiler.


NEW FORMAT


Title: (rating/10)
Author:
Monster Count has been removed
Monster Type (what kinds of monsters will you be facing)
Description


Screenies! (If I know how to get them on here without emailing, cause my emails all clogged with useless junk all the time, and it takes forever to send/receive.)


I must also never give up! I will break my promise.

[manjar]

doomaddict said:

NEW FORMAT


Title: (rating/10)
Author:
Monster Count has been removed
Monster Type (what kinds of monsters will you be facing)
Description

You're still revealing spoilers by telling us what kind of monsters 'we' will be facing. Your theory of anti-spoilers is once again failing.

Screenies! (If I know how to get them on here without emailing, cause my emails all clogged with useless junk all the time, and it takes forever to send/receive.)

Use Imageshack, kill their bandwith and the Doomworld forums database with one stone. It works wonders, no?

I must also never give up! I will break my promise.

For better or worse, I say.

[doomaddict]

READ what it says above the format, Manjar.

With the breaking of promises, it's for the better because I don't want to embarass myself. I will play the IDGAMES Archive for fun, and perhaps write a review just to remind myself if I should replay it.

[Darkman 4]

Hahahaha. Nice title.

[Scuba Steve]

Grimm said:

Sure I could. Action DooM gets a 4/5, 01Fava gets a 5/5.

What? You useless slag! You're not fit to lick the dirt from my sandals.

[doomaddict]

ACTION DOOM gets a 5/5. Only problem with the wad is that it's too short. There needs to be more Action when it comes to playing DOOM.

Scuba Steve said:

What? You useless slag! You're not fit to lick the dirt from my sandals.

Poor Grimm. He just got insulted by the glorius Scuba Steve, one of the very, very few ledgendary wad creators ever to exist.