Forums > Contributor Zone > Week 5 results, aka: we'll do better next time, really!

~~~ Team Battle: Wolfqueen v Leroux ~~~

Genj?? versus Leroux??
Genj: Too Human
Leroux: Super Mario Bros 3

ASchultz:
Genj's review feels serviceable but never really soars--perhaps it gets tangled in mentioning too often that the game has elements of Norse mythology and science fiction. Stuff like the last 3 sentences of paragraph 2--bounces the reader back and forth when the sentences probably could be shuffled. Every paragraph feels like it could be pared down and there are lots of phrases that could be tweaked (tons of cool weapons...it's a blast) and that sort of thing may work a couple times but the review goes to the well a bit too often. I'm also confused about the death scene--they made you invincible, so apparently you die in combat, but it's not how you die in Valhalla--reorganization would make this clear.

I enjoyed Leroux's review. It seems to know when to shut up leaving me wanting a little more. I think it's about right to compact the later worlds into a much shorter span than the starts. It's a lot of fun, and if the next-last paragraph nags me a bit with inside-joke puns, that's okay. Perhaps I'd like to hear about a silly trick or two you used to get better. On playing this game, it is neat both to see for the first time and learn the secrets of. That's hard to capture, and if it's not done perfectly here, it's done well.

Winner: LEROUX

-----

CoarseDragon:
Genj - Too Human: Norse robots are about a strange as this game seemed to turn out. This review read somewhat disjointed for me. Starting paragraphs with “Unfortunately it all doesn’t work.” and “There’s another problem too:” seemed wrong. There were a few holes too as alignment was mentioned but not explained and five character classes are mentioned but only three are listed.

Leroux - Super Mario Bros 3: I have been playing games since ’81 but I have not played (but am familiar with) any Super Mario Brothers game and this review does not inspire me to try. This review seems more a homage to the game than a review of the game. Even though it is well written the references show upon blind eyes, or fall upon deaf ears if you prefer.

Genj vs. Leroux: Leroux is the winner

-----

Zigfried:
Genj (Too Human)
I guess Silicon Knights realized that cyberpunk was dead, hence the need for injecting vikings. Anyways, I don't know your own thoughts about this review, but I thought it was the strongest/tightest review you've submitted thus far for the contest. Every detail felt pertinent and you justified the 5/10 score appropriately. It was really an interesting read that looked at what the game once appeared to be, what it is, and then clearly labeled and addressed each item that would be important for such a game. It's an effective and descriptive review. The pun in the last line was pretty horrendous, though!

Leroux (Super Mario Bros 3)
I love to see emotional reviews like this. Unfortunately, this one doesn't connect with me. It probably doesn't help that I never played SMB3 (and to date, have never cared to do so). You make a point about segues that feels uncommon and insightful and I think that's a very smart thing to do when writing about such a popular game; it gives the writing some lasting relevance. I respect your spirit, but I'm not stirred.

My pick: Genj

Ultimate Victor: Leroux (2-1)

*****************************************

Wolfqueen?? versus Venter??
Wolfqueen: Half-Life 2
Venter: LEGO Harry Potter

ASchultz:
Wolfqueen's review grew on me. First I thought, this isn't really about the game, but on rereading it was pretty clear it was. While I can do without the "Through Gordon's Eyes" chorus, everything between it works well. I put my cynic hat on, saying, "yes, but what is this game ABOUT," and on reading the other reviews and re-reading, yeah, it's all there.

I didn't click on this til the end and noticed it was a featured review. I wasn't surprised, looking back on it.

Venter's introduction perhaps reads too much like HP fanboyism. "The mystery is there" + "that fact" = well, something subjective can't be fact. That sort of thing. I'd rather read: "LEGO HP 1-4 works way better than LEGO IJ2. If it has too much collection, so be it." And WRT the words in the movie vs the game--isn't it easier to say "It's only for fans?" But I think where this review falls sohort of Wolfqueen's is, it reads a bit like an instruction brochure ("For the most part" paragraph.) Then "What we don't see here, the mind can easily fill in on our behalf." contradicts "If you haven't seen the movies or read the books, most of what matters will make no sense."

I hope I blocked out my intense dislike of all things Harry Potter to be objective with this review. It is a good one. But I think there's still enough positive in the other one that it would be hard to beat in any case. I think Wolfqueen's review does a good job describing atmosphere, while Venter's does a good job describing why Potter fans will like this, too. Both work well. One shoots higher than the other.

Winner: WOLFQUEEN

-----

CoarseDragon:
Wolfqueen - Half Life 2: Half Life is such an iconic shooter and this review brings that fact to life for us readers. I really like “through Gordon’s eyes” as lead-ins to the next section of the review.

Venter - Lego Harry Potter: Years 1-4: While it is true that anyone who likes Harry Potter would probably want to play a Harry Potter game but what about the rest of the people. If you know very little to nothing about Harry Potter is the game fun to play? It is clear the game is fun if you know Hogwarts and that part is explained very nicely.

WolfQueen vs. Venter: Wolfqueen is the winner

-----

Zigfried:
Wolfqueen (Half-Life 2)
This is a nice review that tries something different and works. It's dramatically pretentious but effective at telling a story. This is what we used to call a "promethean" review. It's nice to read one of those every now and then -- this review excels at providing meaty descriptions that make it easy to savor the game's rich atmosphere. If I looked really hard, I could probably find some sentences or words that I would change, but why would I look that hard? It's more fun to just read and enjoy.

Honestgamer (LEGO Harry Potter)
Class sessions? Argh! Anyways, I like the concept of focusing on Hogwarts Castle. Towards that point, however, I was left with some questions. While a lot of things certainly seem to happen inside the castle (and the example of Nick was a nice way to demonstrate non-linearity), does the castle really behave in the freakish way it did in the movies, what with staircases moving and all that jazz? I only ask because you did make a big deal of the castle itself, and there's a difference between the environment versus all the things that appear/happen within that environment. The review makes this sound like a wonderland of things to discover and collect. I'm just not sold that the castle itself is really all that special -- at least not to the extent of Symphony of the Night's castle. I'm also not a diehard Harry Potter fan, so perhaps I'm taking your words more literally than others would. This was a pretty great review, and the above is a question (as I'm now interested in the game) rather than an excuse to vote against you. You're up against something that feels particularly unique and provocative, so the below is a vote for your opponent rather than a vote against you.

My pick: Wolfqueen

Ultimate Victor: Wolfqueen (3-0)

*****************************************

Suskie?? versus Jerec??
Suskie: Crackdown
Jerec: Animal Crossing

ASchultz:
Jerec's review is an interesting blindside. It's funny how I remember how hyped Animal Crossing was, and how I've read stories of people playing too much, seeing their parents start, growing bored, or framing Tom Nook as a child labor exploiter. I think with a game like Animal Crossing you don't want to get bogged down in controls, so a story is a good option. But, despite the amusing bits about stupid animals in awe of fornitue bought with hot silverware, I think we may have heard the story before? Gaining money and then getting sick of it? But all the same, you may have ripped yourself off a bit by not talking with Animal Crossing acquaintances and trading for stuff. And the moralizing at the end is heavy-handed. I find it hard to believe you wouldn't be even sicker of the whole deal the second time through. Perhaps you could relate this to real life somehow? Obviously, there's a risk of intense cheesiness, but the end stumbles as is and I don't know what else to suggest.

Suskie's review is very good. I know I'm anal about italics but all the same I think his effort trumps Jerec's. Jerec's is about looking for something to do--except for some unachievable goals--and losing purpose and deflation in the end. Suskie's is about more than that and about the dangers of having too much to do and not knowing how to do it. It has the circular buildup of orbs, like Jerec sees money in Animal Crossing. It offers suggestions without being a panegyric. It offers specifics of what would be better beyond "I guess I'll make better computer friends whose cheesiness I kind of exposed anyway." It makes me think about how I'd like to blow stuff up despite being a hardcore puzzler.

Winner: SUSKIE

-----

CoarseDragon:
Suskie - Crackdown: I like exploring large game worlds as long as I get rewarded for doing so, however a game should not let you fight the end boss before you are really ready. I could feel the pain in this review as we went from a really cool sounding open-ended world to a badly developed and presented open-ended world.

Jerec - Animal Crossing: I enjoyed the first person story telling presentation in this review, albeit a long winded story. I am not so sure the story told me all I wanted to know about the game though. I felt some things were missing in the story. Who (character wise) is telling this story? Where did those other animals go and why did they really leave?

Suskie vs. Jerec: Suskie is the winner

-----

Zigfried:
Suskie (Crackdown)
This is an excellent review, but I think the game choice hurt you from a "contest" perspective. It sounds like a game that follows a checklist method of design, and your analysis is thorough and believable. This review does nothing wrong, but I'm not voting for it, because I just liked Jerec's review better.

Jerec (Animal Crossing)
This is a refreshing one, although I suspect you knew as much. The way you describe your arrival and introduction to Jerktown feels very much like the actual process of moving into a new town. Survey the area, find a job, meet the neighbors. Your experiences in Jerktown follow an often surprising flow -- the part about becoming a social outcast was interesting, and also provided a nice segue from "people" to "activities". The ultimate descent into apathy really captures the sad realization that there's nothing more to be done, although I like how you capped the review with the value of memories. In a sense, the what you've described is a phase of life (just replace "destroy the town and kill everyone" with "move out and never call anyone ever again") but you've done it in a way that effectively serves as a review through illustration.

My pick: Jerec

Ultimate Victor: Suskie (2-1)

THE FINAL SUMMATION:
Wolfqueen's team wins. ASchultz will be doing the fancy number work.

//Zig

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.

~~~ Team Battle: Janus vs Overdrive ~~~

Janus?? versus True??
Janus: Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection
True: Silent Hill Homecoming

ASchultz:
I really groaned when I read a review of a compilation. In a team tournament. But it makes sense and works well. And it jibes with my experience of collections--why is this a good collection? It's pretty embarrassing, the new features, clearly--and describing everything takes too much time. I tried that once. Oh, errm, you used "quite" 3 times quite near each other. Ahem.

True, this is largely well done but I think the repetition piles up too quickly too early. When you mention "it becomes subtle and psychological," well, it's a bit too obvious. And it jars with switching between I/you/Alex. And I think stuff like the 2nd last paragraph where you pile up a lot of adjectives might work better as: "Alex's army vet experience isn't just background thrown in. You see it in the combos he can use. Some are critical to defeat a powerful boss with just a knife. But they don't feel like cheating because..." versus "I found it quite useful. Certainly not a complaint."

This is another review where I think I see where it's going, but it's not there yet. And it's more ambitious than Janus's, but Janus's is more organized and makes the sort of good point I never bothered to make myself. The moments of wanting to clean the review up hurt things in True's review, so:

WINNER: JANUS

-----

CoarseDragon:
Janus - Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection: This review points out that you can’t please all the people all the time but you can please some of the people some of the time. It also points out the historical significance of such compilations. Since it is obvious that you cannot review every game in such a case you need to be concise and tackle just a couple. We did get s short list of games in the compilation and I felt that was adequate.

True - Silent Hill: Homecoming: Writing a review about a horror game can be tough because so much involved in scaring us is visual. Translating that to the written word can be very difficult. This review did a fine job of drawing us into the game world. Although I have no idea how the game plays I do know that if I do play I will probably be scared to death by it.

Janus vs. True: True is the winner by a very slight margin

-----

Zigfried:
Janus (Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection)
This is an interesting review that touches on several paths -- console inadequacy, emulation morality, game inclusion, and even a bit of storytelling -- but didn't go deep enough into any of those to truly satisfy me. I wouldn't recommend delving into ALL of them, but perhaps a bit more on one of them -- ie, the Alien Storm example is great, but I don't think it's quite enough to get at the sense of undiscovered/rediscovered treasure that you set up at the review's end. It's still a worthwhile review that concludes on a good note.

True (Silent Hill: Homecoming)
This review began on an overly melodramatic note -- if the original truly left you destroyed and distraught, then that's kind of scary. I certainly wouldn't play games with you, that's for sure. I suspect you were waxing poetic, but still. There are also some odd grammatical bits, such as the incomplete sentence in the second paragraph. After that, your writing focused and felt more grounded, even while describing outlandish scenarios. You talked about concrete events and feelings that seemed genuine. You made me want to see what you had seen -- while still leaving me with a sense of trepidation. This is a strong review and I'm a little surprised that the game actually turned out so well.

My pick: True

Ultimate Victor: True (2-1)

*****************************************

Bluberry?? versus Overdrive??
Bluberry: Star Wars Dark Forces
Overdrive: Star Wars Dark Forces

ASchultz:
Bluberry vs Overdrive: You can take the Doom out of the team tournament but you can't take the Doom out of the team tournament competitors, eh?

Bluberry's review--well, from Doom Clone to Kell Dragon is good stuff, except for the math jokes. And I think I see what you did there with "rather rotund." I may or may not have seen what you did elsewhere, too. I'll let you be the judge of that. I will pretend you did stuff that you may or may not have wanted judges to catch elsewhere, too, just so I can say I'm observant and reading into things like a good little judge. Overall, though, it seemed like you had a lot of fun writing your review, and that's what you'll ultimately remember more than a team tourney vote years...er, weeks...down the road.

Overdrive's review is good stuff. Really, I hated being dragged to the front of the class as a Good Example, but I'm doing that here. The nightmares are born good/bad and not too much looking back to youth...and of course the bits about stuff taken from Star Wars that's fun to imagine even for people who suck at shooting stuff sorts of games. What to fix? Zap the last two sentences, maybe.

Winner: OVERDRIVE

-----

CoarseDragon:
Bluberry - Star Wars Dark Forces: I don’t know what Hilbert’s cube has to do with Dark Forces nor was I able to figure out what Dark Troopers are. Why only at the end of the review did we really get told anything about the game.

Overdrive - Star Wars Dark Forces: I was a shame to hear that the Force was not with us in this game. Star Wars and the Force are like peanut butter and jelly. Fortunately we did get to learn quite a bit about the game and in a very exciting way.

Bluberry vs. Overdrive: Overdrive is the winner

-----

Zigfried:
Bluberry (Star Wars: Dark Forces)
This is beautiful. "I really only cared about Star Wars: Dark Forces and not Dark Forces itself." .... referring to Doom's environment as a sphere .... subspaces of the Hilbert cube .... I don't know what any of these things mean but it's like an unintelligible song sung by hot Korean girls: I can't help but masturbate. Lines like "spent as much time in development as a crack baby" are funny but make too much sense, and would be better used in other lesser reviews. Although my level of education isn't high enough to follow all of your equations, I admire your gutsy stylistic choices of style. I appreciated how after your highbrow preamble, you conclude by telling us about the game with a down-to-earth paragraph about Robin and payphones. So even though I spent most of the review delightfully puzzled, I still feel like I learned something about the game at the end. By the way, you lose.

Overdrive (Star Wars: Dark Forces)
Hm. Comparing these two reviews, it sounds like the Macintosh version is a bit different from the PC one. I too remember the days when crouching was cool. I vaguely recall when this game was a big deal, although I never played it. It's cool how you describe the game in such a flowing, easy-to-follow way (with a notable lack of mathematical formulas) -- with your heartfelt style, you make it look so easy to play through a game and just write about it. It's also interesting how you started with a story about a hero with a distinct name, and end with the realization that he's just another FPS grunt. I'm glad that I learned about the game, even if I did have to read two reviews to get there.

My pick: Overdrive

Ultimate Victor: Overdrive (3-0)

*****************************************

Asherdeus?? versus Zippdementia??
Asherdeus: Jurassic The Hunted
Zippdementia: God of War III

ASchultz:
Asherdeus vs Zipp: 2 really good sentences to start the reviews--I like Asher's better because it isn't self-referential.

And Asher's review certainly kicks a bad game well. But perhaps it is a bit too easy a target. An analogy here is to gymnastics or ice skating. I am sure Asher is too manly for either of these pursuits. I am too manly to judge them. But the judges can only give so many points for a perfect execution of a minor move. That's what happened here.

And Zipp's review, while I see some stuff I'd change beyond the usual "Here's what my style's like," is very good. It argues less is more--argues character vs characters, points out gods are now just bosses, and the fourth paragraph may be overselling things. But Kratos vs Zeus and the son/mirroring attacks thing is good. It's not too cynical and not too obvious, and we haven't heard it too often before. Or I haven't. It'd be easy to phrase this as some wimpy "violence is not the answer" but you never do.

Winner: ZIPP

-----

CoarseDragon:
Asherdeus - Jurassic: The Hunted: Tyrannosaurus rex king of the dinosaurs barely makes an appearance? Are you kidding me? I guess the big selling point of this game was lots of dinosaur and the Adrenaline Burst feature (a shame that was not mentioned). Shooting dinosaurs should be fun to bad that did not happen in this game.

Zipp – God of War III: We get a brilliant explanation of the evolution of Kratos and consequently an explanation of why the game mostly fails at the characterization of Kratos himself. It is truly a shame when developers use a great franchise in such a lame way.

Asherdeus vs. Zipp: Zipp is the winner

-----

Zigfried:
Asherdeus (Jurassic: The Hunted)
Hahaha, this game sounds like a pile. The part about mowing down tiny dinosaurs was particularly telling. This is a quick, fast-paced, punchy review that never falters. I like it. From a contest perspective, the only issue is that the game appeared to be such an easy target that I can't say I'm surprised. I enjoyed this review, but I enjoy more ambitious or insightful stuff even more. No reason to change anything here -- just sayin'.

Zippdementia (God of War III)
In the grand scheme of the world, this one is more ambitious. It's a grounded look at a game that (briefly) left many people blubbering like twitterpated cartoon animals. In the grand scheme of this particular contest, this was a "safe" choice because you already knew I was going to agree with your take on the game. But I'm still going to give you the win because it's a thorough (but not overly long) look at a game that contains a lot of noteworthy content. I particularly appreciated your look at Kratos and the comparison to a machine -- at this point, that's what he is, a robot behaving the way Sony has programmed him to behave. I liked this review when I first read it a couple months ago, and I still like it now. Don't really have much to recommend.

My pick: Zippdementia

Ultimate Victor: Zippdementia (3-0)

THE FINAL SUMMATION:
Overdrive's team wins. ASchultz will be doing the fancy number work.

//Zig

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.

Thank you, again, Judges for your fine critiques. They were definitely worth waiting for. As well, Janus for a very tough battle. I was sure you had this one in the bag, so to speak.

If you'll excuse me, I'm now going to go write a blog bragging about how I, alone, lowly True Baby beat someone seemingly unbeatable. The Goliath of the 2010 Team Tournament, Master Of The Metaphor, Earl Of Eloquence, Duke of Description, King Of Reviewing...Janus.

And yes, it does make it that much better because I know he's not my biggest fan.

If I Offended You, You Needed It.

The first thing I did when I opened this thread was look for Zig's comments on Bluberry's review. I was not disappointed.

And hey, we're still going strong. Go us.

Thanks to people.

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

I'll admit I went with a safe review this time, but I'm still glad for the comments because I don't recall it getting that much feedback on its initial post. It was a little late after release to expect much feedback then and it's a little late in the season now to be taking risks. I wanted to make sure we won this week.

At the very least, it's good to know I'm not lauding a review for being good when in fact it sucks. It helps to know that I'm not totally off the work in thinking this was a good review.

This coming week's choice is a more "out there" pick and I think one I've owed to the judges for reading more formulaic work of mine all tourney.

Note to gamers: when someone shoots you in the face, they aren't "gay." They are "psychopathic."

I don't know what any of these things mean but it's like an unintelligible song sung by hot Korean girls: I can't help but masturbate.

You're only human, Zig. We are all powerless against them.

If I Offended You, You Needed It.

While an easy target, the game actually only has a handful of reviews across the Internet and of the four professional reviews I found, one is awful and another you can't read online. I base most of the reviews that I write on games that no one else on Thunderbolt has reviewed that I can get for cheap. Thanks for the comments.

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.

Sorry I couldn't beat Leroux, guys. I have dragged us down to first place.

Thanks to the judges, etc.

_

I was so saddened by your negativity that unfortunately it all didn't work.

_

I will pretend you did stuff that you may or may not have wanted judges to catch elsewhere

you have no idea.

Why only at the end of the review did we really get told anything about the game.

you mean the stuff I copied from the back of the box? you truly have no idea.

Oh no, it's a Goomba!

Are you serious? I read Suskie's post earlier and I'm curious just exactly what the fuck he said to warrant someone deleting it.

If I Offended You, You Needed It.

And yes, it does make it that much better because I know he's not my biggest fan.

I can understand why my comments in various feedback threads and ROTWs would lead you to this impression. But we're not sports teams. This is a community of writers. In my opinion, you've written some really excellent reviews (one off the top of my head: Prototype) that are rightly praised because the writing is emotional and powerful and sells the experience of playing whatever game it is that you're covering. However, it feels like you are striving for this "epic" tone with every review you write. This leads to some rather overblown efforts where the attempt at style ("I have many games from my past") gets in the way of any substance (your Super Mario Galaxy 2 review didn't really say much about the actual game). I just think that maybe you could tone down the melodrama, rely on your natural enthusiasm for gaming and writing, and tell me something interesting about the games you review.

I'm not trying to troll you or incite a feud or anything. I'm just making my opinion clear, because obviously you have this vague notion that I'm not a fan. No one has to like everything you write, just as no one likes everything I, or anybody else, writes. I think what's important is that people say why they didn't like something so that a reviewer can understand how people view their writing, whether they act on the comments or not.

Anyway, your Silent Hill Homecoming is a very vivid and effective review. Well done.

"fuck yeah oblivion" - Jihad

Thanks for the feedback, guys. I'm glad everyone liked the review. Even though we won, I'm kind of sorry that, at least on my end, I couldn't have done so with a new review, but that's alright. Congrats to the rest of my team as well as everone else in the tournament.

I can't believe how close this all has suddenly become.

Zig: Interestingly, I didn't know (or didn't remember) that the style was promethean, so that's pretty cool. Also, no one has called any of my reviews pretentious before (except for the Mother one, but that was deliberate). ;) I'm both honored and flattered. =D

[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

Interesting, I was just thinking of Jerec's Animal Crossing review this morning. Not because I knew it was in this comp or anything.

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.

True, it was deleted for sexual tension.

_

Are you serious? I read Suskie's post earlier and I'm curious just exactly what the fuck he said to warrant someone deleting it.

I said something like, "I'm pretty sure it was my negativity that did that." Amazing how RunningFree's shit stays intact while I get modded for making a fucking joke. Quite a staff team we've got here at HonestGamers.

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

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.

Let me repeat something that I just said privately to a couple of people: The angrier you make me, the longer this is going to drag on. The sooner y'all learn to just man up and take a joke, the happier we'll be.

Yes, I'm making jokes. But grown men who act like babies deserve far more than what I'm doing right now.

Now, I'd better save this post in case it gets deleted.

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

Janus,

My comment was at least slightly uncalled for and I hope you didn't take it too seriously. I was just making a bad joke--sort of like "Hey, look what I did", because I consider it a very big deal to beat you, and I was just being snarky. In all truth, I actually agree with what you say. I think I even wrote a blog about it, and where my commitment truly lies and why it leaks through in my reviews.

If I Offended You, You Needed It.

Janus took one of your jokes too seriously? I guess you should be modded, then.

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

I don't mean this in a bitchy way, but I do think there's no pleasing you, Schultz. And then I remember last tourney where I voted against you most of the time. I think that what we write, what we expect out of reviews, is just way too different.

I think I know how you might have felt. :P

Also, CD, your judgement absolutely baffles me. I've read it three times now and I still don't know what to make of it.

I can avoid death by not having a life.

Janus took one of your jokes too seriously? I guess you should be modded, then.

No, that was kind of my fault. In my head it was funny and meant as playful banter, but in looking back on it now it seems like I pulled an Emp. You know, where I pretend to let go of things that happened a year ago, but rather I bottled them up, and--unprovoked--lash out on said person for an entirely different reason.

$20 says that gets modded.

If I Offended You, You Needed It.

True, if you're serious, I'll take you up on that bet.

//Zig

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.

Jerec, you're right. And I think it sucks when I see two good reviews and I have to pick a winner, but that requires finding something wrong. I don't see any way around it. I think this week's matchup against Leroux was a good one, and it's good to see people take chances like that.

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