Forums > Contributor Zone > BRACKET: ROUND ONE, STAGE THREE

Felix vs. DE

Both reviews had a similar tone right out of the gate. "Wasn't gaming great back in the day? ~sigh~". It's a bit of a sour note for me, but then I'm one of those crazy folk who honestly think that gaming has gotten better in recent years, on the whole. Felix's review wasn't bad. Mechanically, it flowed pretty well and whatnot, although there was some odd word choice. In the end I just don't feel like it explained its stance well enough. It's a kind-of-but-not-really-RPG with a fun combat system, but almost no combat. Eh. Further, no levels, and no equipment to manage. Meh. I do agree that a good story can make up for those things, and the story is reportedly the strength, but aside from some zany snippets, we know nothing about the story. DE's review was much safer, though it did read like an early attempt at reviewing, partially because it was so safe. It's standard fare from beginning to end. Nothing really stood out as bad, nor as excellent. However by the end I feel like it made its point better, so he gets the nod.

Winner: DE

Will vs. EmP

First of all, I feel like Will's use of "On with the review" worked fairly well in the context that it was used. It was less of the jarring filler transition you see in Gamefaqs reviews and more of a legitimate way to move from discussing system requirements (an important thing to note in a PC review) to discussing the actual game. I felt it worked. A lot of people don't. ~shrug~

That said, Will's review was almost completely impenetrable. I've played my share of RTS, I enjoy the genre, I know what turtling is. The review is just so laborious in its description of everything that it's hard to take all at once. However! That kind of dry dissection of facts is probably what people who play SupCom want. I could say that this review appeals to a very niche crowd, and it does, but it's a review for an expansion pack, so I imagine only that niche crowd is going to ever read it. I think it's a fine review at what it's for, but it's probably not the strongest tourney piece. It's a very dry read. EmP's review, on the other hand, was half over before it felt like it got out of the introduction. The point was made, however. I understand that the game is almost, but not quite, good at what it does. With random design flops that destroy the mood. It's also a shorter and easier read than Will's behemoth. Not EmP's best work, but it takes the round.

Winner: EmP

Venter vs. Cairo

These reviews were both really good. Even though I quite enjoyed Assassin's Creed, I found myself smiling at many clever observations Cairo made, and even agreeing with many. A bash for the ages, one that I somehow agree with, even if I don't agree with it. Venter's review is a bit more textbook. By no means bad, and it makes its case. Most of his examples are solid, I found myself especially glad of the paragraph on timed action sequences, as those are a major stumbling block nowadays. And it did serve well to illustrate the general polish on everything. This was easily the closest match of the round, but I have to say I enjoyed Cairo's review more. It was longer, and yet it still flew by.

Winner: Cairo

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! Lazy verdicts!

DE beats Felix

EmP beats Will

HG beats Cairo

The Felix-DE match was the closest for me--both solid reviews. I was unfortunately feeling very bored reading Will's review and had to force myself to finish it, though I imagine that's because I find RTSs dull and can count the number I've played extensively with my left thumb. Covering an expansion for an RTS I know nothing about gave EmP an easy win. A better pick would have seen Will put up a better fight. Finally, I didn't like Cairo's as much as everyone else. I've never played Assassin's Creed before, and while it was engaging, the review failed to convince me that the game deserves a 3. At times, points felt exaggerated in an attempt to justify that low score. Loved HG's review, though.

...

Felix vs. DE

Felix's review was written with a ton of heart and while there may be some technical hiccups here and there that have been beaten into the ground by everyone else at this point, it's a more engaging read than DE's more structured piece. My mind wandered while reading DE's but when reading Felix all eyes were on Basted and its two lovable main characters.

Felix spanks DE

Will vs. ShrEmP Burger

This wasn't even a contest. Will's review starts out with a self-introduction and making the claim that he's the HG RTS guy.

Uh, ok. So what?

With even more words like grabskis and then all the LOLINTERNETDRAMA over "on with the review" (Which is a shitty line, by the way.) You're a much better writer than this, Will.

EmP's review is filled with flowery language and though sometimes it seems like he's trying to connect as many adjectives to nouns as he can get away with, it at least showcases his excellent vocabulary, whereas mine's just filled with words like cockfucking shitstain.

ShrEmP Burger spanks Will

Venter vs. Cairo

Venter wrote an engaging, gushing review about a game that ultimately failed to register a blip on my radar, most likely because:

A. I barely watch movies because Hollywood has about 2 good ideas a year.
B. Thus movie-based games are basically a lost cause.

However, with Venter's consistently strong writing, he manages to sell me on a game that I WOULD buy if I cared enough about the Bourne series to actually be interested in the areas its trying to sell.

But I don't.

Cairo's review, on the other hand, is a nice bash of some game that I own but have never placed into my Xbox 360 (fucking backlog...). The review is dripping with witty sarcasm and is a very entertaining read. However, it's also filled with juvenile lines like Douche Desmond. *groan* In the end, I came away liking Venter's just a hair more, despite Cairo's very strong entry. This was the hardest match for me to judge for this entire tournament.

Venter spanks Cairo

Your girlfriend's name ends in .jpg

Eh...

Sorry for being such a drama llama, guys. I guess I sometimes forget that The Internet Is Serious Business. :)

"Either, sir, you're an ass or you're masquerading as one."
- Nero Wolfe

Just realized I never voted in the Jason vs. Cairo match. I don't feel like getting into a big explanation here, but I vote for Cairo. It's a case of a great review being beaten by a fantastic one.

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

Scores tallied from the above posts and Will's score:

Felix Arabia - 7
Vs.
Dark Eternal - 6

EmP - 11
Vs.
Will the Great - 2

Johnny Cairo - 7
Vs.
Jasey Venter - 5

I don't have to boost my review resume because I have real resume.

Almost forgot.

LAST MINUTE ENTRY

Felix vs darketernal

ADVANTAGE: DE

HG vs Cairo

ADVANTAGE: HG

"Either, sir, you're an ass or you're masquerading as one."
- Nero Wolfe

OD has until I go to bed or get bored waiting before he loses his chance to vote on the last match.

Other voters should head over to the forth stage and start there.

For us. For them. For you.

Felix
EmP
Cairo

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.

since it sounds as if you'll close this soon:

darketernal, you, and Cairo

I'll edit in some text later if you've not locked it all up by then.

Oh no, it's a Goomba!

I'm not going to be back by a computer until 10ish at the earliest (3.5 hours or so), so as to be counted, my last pick is

CAIRO

I'll edit in my reasoning then. And it will be epic.

I'm not afraid to die because I am invincible
Viva la muerte, that's my goddamn principle

CLOSED. New votes will be nuked.

I'll leave the topic open for people who want to edit in comments. For now.

For us. For them. For you.

OD can still unlock it anyway.

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

But Boo can't.

For us. For them. For you.

I vote Venter over Cairo.

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." - John F. Kennedy on reality

"What if everything you see is more than what you see--the person next to you is a warrior and the space that appears empty is a secret door to another world? What if something appears that shouldn't? You either dismiss it, or you accept that there is much more to the world than you think. Perhaps it really is a doorway, and if you choose to go inside, you'll find many unexpected things." - Shigeru Miyamoto

You'll have to give me more time, then. At least a week... I'm very busy this week.

Also, Felix ad DE are tied now, I think, so... what'll we do with that? Hm...

What espiga does in his free time
[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

We're not tied. EmP just is too lazy to keep current scores since he's a s bloody shrimp. DE has the most votes of the losers, so he advances any way.

I don't have to boost my review resume because I have real resume.

Oh. Well, I thought the score you'd posted hadn't included the three or so later votes.

Most everything (if not all of it) I have to say has been said already. But here's my feedback anyway. If it's not as detailed as I usually make it, I'm sorry. But time still isn't really my friend right now.

Felix over DE

Alright. Upon reading Felix's review again, I can see why it got the commentary it did. I understand it's unconvincing nature in that I'd likely not want to play a game whose main focus seems to be cutscenes and has very little in the way of combat. However, this appears to be the point of his review. That the game is one of (if not the) first of its kind to produce cutscenes in any sort of important fashion like that. Also, he clearly pointed out that the combat, while lacking, is unique, something that may actually be worth checking out despite the othewise uappealing nature of the game. He's also colorful enough in his writing to hold my attention, and also somewhat removes the sense of unconvincingness present there.

On the other hand, while DE's review is more convincing in the end, I had difficulty paying attention. Perhaps it's because this is so old, but this one reads a bit too slowly for me... The writing feels dry and elongated, if that makes sense. So much so that even though it's clear, for the most part, I have to reread sentences several times because I just can't stay focused. It's also plagued with minor errors and sentences that could use shortening or better phrasing. In a sense, it reads like a rookie review - a decent review, but a rookie review nonetheless. It's obvious in lines like the first of his real concluding paragraph. Still, I liked how he described the game. It just could've been done so much more smoothly.

And I think the somewhat unnecessary sexual references actuallyhelped in this case since they added a bit of humor... or... something... >_>

EmP over Will

I don't know what everyone's so uptight about "ooh, it's too fanficky". Ok, sure, maybe that's what fanfics are for, but still, I like reading that sort of thing in a review. As long as it's appropriate. And it definitely is here with EmP's review. I honestly can't see any better way of him describing those various scenes. Considering it's a puzzle game, which are really hard to review in the first place, this only adds to the imagery of the game. It paints a clear (and gross, with all the gore, apparently) picture of the world which may not be presented as easily with other writing styles. It grabs your attention, pulls you in and leaves you there. And when he does transition into talking about puzzles themselves, it's hardly noticeable. Really, the only jarring thing in this whole review is when he's describing that opening sequence or whatever in third person than abruptly switches to narrative in the following paragraph. But then the atmosphere is restored soon enough anyway. It's a good read. To those who complain of lack of puzzle explanation (which I thought was enough anyway), I'd counter that that wasn't so much the point as was the atmosphere and setting. Since this story is completely different from the book, apparently.

P.S.

I found typos in your review... eihter I missed them the first time I read through or you didn't fix them when I sent them to you. (I did send you edits for this one, right? >_>)

Either way, you can thank me later. Haha.

Will's review, on the other hand, while very informative - really - is way too technical. I mean, I know RTS's pretty well, I think, but he really uses way too much in-game jargon without enough (or in some cases too much) explanation to keep me oriented properly. It's also kind of like DE's in the sense that it's a bit longwinded in places, and is diffiult to pay attention to after a while. Don't get me wrong - I definitely agee that this would be a great review for someone already familiar with the game, and, it being an expansion, maybe that was your point. But I wouldn't have subbed it for this contest either. Sorry, man. =(

Jason over Cairo

These were both great reviews. But to keep it simple, I liked Jason's more because it seemed to get to the point a lot sooner. I mean, the examples were right there, fast, explosive and powerful, and kept me attentative throughout.

Cairo's is great, too, with it's witty sarcastic approach to a game much smiled upon around here (I think). His examples are clear and poignant (oops, stole EmP's word), and generally kept me amused throughout. However, I would complain that some of the analogies or jokes made might be a little high-brow for me. Where I'm not familiar with what he's comparing it to. Still, fun read, and typical Cairo in bashing well-popularized games. A very interesting approach. Honestly, the choice was tough, but I'm ultimately leaning towards Jason.

Edit: Oh. I guess the feedback wasn't that bad after all. Except for maybe Jason's and Cairo's. I hope that's OK. But it's really getting late now... >_>

What espiga does in his free time
[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

I'm totally unfamiliar with forums and am very impressed by all that people helping others on forums.
Why do they do so?

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.

They do it in hopes that those people will then stick around and become part of the experience and that things will grow so that the site can be a really cool place to kill time. At least, that's how I see things. It's not like we're a bunch of philanthropists at heart or anything. ;-)

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." - John F. Kennedy on reality

"What if everything you see is more than what you see--the person next to you is a warrior and the space that appears empty is a secret door to another world? What if something appears that shouldn't? You either dismiss it, or you accept that there is much more to the world than you think. Perhaps it really is a doorway, and if you choose to go inside, you'll find many unexpected things." - Shigeru Miyamoto