Forums > Contributor Zone > REVIEW OF THE WEEK: 3rd - 9th May

I’m late because I don’t conform to things like deadlines. I once met a deadline on the Mean Streets of Surrey, England and I stabbed it right in the eye. That’ll show you, deadline!

RotW is undergoing a bit of a change that should see these late entries banished to the misty mists of the mist-filled pasts. But what does not change is the rules which remain as follows:

NO staff reviews
NO duplicated reviews for authors
NO respect for deadlines

We shall begin
FIRST: WolfQueen 001 Mother

If you people could see my HG mail inbox over the last few weeks, you would see a barrage of mails from Wolfy demanding I tell her about this review. Every time I’d politely brush her off, she’d return, twice as persistent as before and using more vile threats. So, here.

This is, by quite a margin, the best presented argument of the week. I found myself disagreeing with a few things the judges said on Lewis’ tourney, such as how you should have built more of a mocking tone towards Nintendo, and instead fall into the view that you absolutely nailed this. The problem I now have is to ask myself how this works as a review for the premises of the competition I’m to judge it on. And how much I’m going to dock you for after I see you named not a single character in your play though after me.

The answer is, it’s still great as a review because, much like Drella’s awesome piece on Pong, it bases its focus on the most important aspect of the title -- which isn’t always necessarily strictly gameplay related. This was a fascinating read, despite your constant, constant whining that you’d blow it.

SECOND: Suskie: Zelda II

Foolish Suskie! The world is split into two; but it’s between those who like Doom 3 and those who do not!

For the most part, you do what many others cannot resist and attack the game more than you do the fanbase, and you do so using solid examples, but the review often wavers, unsure if it wants to be an deconstruction of a well-loved game to smacking around the fan base. Hey, I’m cool with mocking fanbases -- I’ve made a career of it -- but it comes across as jarring on a few occasions because of how well you set out your anti-Zelda II stall. The last line is the biggest culprit although I personally really liked it (which explains why I’ve used it before. Lawsuit pending.)

A Zelda II bash is a big project to take on, and it’s one I feel you have tackled competently, leaving those who support the game having to agree with the bulk of your points. Look at them swarm into the feedback topic and the only defence they can give is that they all hated the game at first but kept playing it until they loved it! Fools! You get extra points just for making their defences looks so paper-thin weak.

THIRD: Quasimodo Batman Forever

This review sometimes feels like its main aim is to squeeze in as many one liners as it can -- something it accuses the [awful] Batman Forever film of being guilty as, but it’s a very effective way to walk the reader through what is a point-blank awful game. Maybe it was laid on thick at points, but the review was exactly the right length, let me know what was wrong with the game without spelling it out on crayon and was a fun read. Great review. I demand more!
Hear that? It’s the winds of change! Unless you mean that squelching noise: that’s deadline slowly bleeding to death in the corner. I’m off to watch the life slowly drain out of its eyes.

For us. For them. For you.

Pfft. I only nagged once. Or twice. I can´t remember.

Thanks, though!

[Eating EmP's brain] probably isn't a good idea. I mean... He's British, which means his brain's wired for PAL and your eyes are NTSC. - Will

Thanks for the mention, and yeah, I found the feedback pretty funny as well. On a side note, WQ wrote an excellent review and she absolutely deserved to win, so congrats to her, and to this Quasimodo person too.

You exist because we allow it. And you will end because we demand it.

Gratzes on jobs well done.

Not sure how to make a sig? While logged into your account, you can edit it and your other public and private information from the Settings page.

Good to see someone new, and I guess wolfqueen's piece won a 1st place on the heels of a 2nd place in a big tournament.

Wolfqueen's thoughts on piracy/emulation and its good/bad triggered the recurring question I have of of how much emulation can improve a formerly bad/too-difficult game. Obviously Mother doesn't need the improvement, but I can think of games that could.

My principal said, 'Emo, Emo, Emo.'
I said 'I'm the one in the middle, you lousy drunk!'
-- Emo Phillips

I just now noticed this. Thanks for the honor (even though you spelled my username incorrectly :p .) I had been recently messing around with my old Sega Genesis and Sega CD and found that pile of drivel in my collection. After revisiting its awfulness, I felt a proper bash-fest of a review was in order.

Oh, and I have also written a few reviews for Honest Gamers as a contributor under my real name, Jeremy Wood. So, I'm not entirely new.

Not sure how to make a sig? While logged into your account, you can edit it and your other public and private information from the Settings page.