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

Voting is still open on Stage Three and has been for a while (you‘re all slow), now we have the last stage of the last round. This one has a SUPER-SECRET match!

---

Drella vs. PAJ89

---

Vorty vs. Espiga

---

The usual rules apply. As soon as a round goes live, you are all free to vote.

---

For us. For them. For you.

Before I forget, I'll go with my Sega Superstars Tennis review.

---

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.

Two Worlds =o

---

Your girlfriend's name ends in .jpg

:@

---

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.

Ed Randy

P.S. I just recently moved and don't consistently have Internet, so my apologies for not keeping up with this too well.

---

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.

Vorty vs. Espiga
Winner: Espiga

No one is better at wang lines than Golden Vortex. From his infamous “precious cock” line in his extinct X-CHANGE review to the closing line in this excellent Splatterhouse review, this guy knows how to incorporate the phallus into his writing. The introduction was a little standard in that I’ve seen plenty of reviews begin in similar manners. Game X influenced Game Y and Game Z. It’s not earth shattering, but it’s an appropriate intro. Espiga’s Two Worlds review, on the other hand, doesn’t contain any penis lines, but it does start off with him mentioning his friend SPAZ. SPAZ reminds me of Zig’s pal Mats, but not as cool. Anyways, once we get to the body of these two reviews, a lot of good information is given and the delivery is admirable. I really liked both reviews quite a bit. Espiga’s flowed a little better, but I think Vorty gave better descriptions. I thought this match was incredibly close, probably the closest for me of all the matches so far in this competition. I’m going to give Espiga the slightest of slight edges, though. And the reason why is because in Vorty’s review, the first line of the second to last paragraph is missing a word, so the thought is left dangling. It’s a minor thing, but it's enough to make a difference since both of these reviews were really good.

Drella vs. PAJ
Winner: Drella

This match was a lot closer than I thought it would be, though Drella is still the clear winner in my mind. Having not read PAJ’s Sega Superstar Tennis review before, I initially wasn’t too thrilled about having to read about tennis since it’s, you know, tennis. Despite those preconceived feelings of dread, this review turned out to be very well written and even interesting! Unfortunately, it loses out to Drella’s excellent Edward Randy review because SST just isn’t as exciting of a game, partly because PAJ described it as a hit or miss kind of title. Edward Randy is full of craziness, and those descriptions ring clear in Drella’s extremely descriptive writing. The Jackson Pollack and spilled milk comparisons, while a possible point of contention for some readers, made a lot of sense to me in their outlandishness. I mean, this is an outlandish game, so the metaphors fit.

---

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

Drella vs PAJ89
Winner: Drella

I liked Drella's review -- a lot. Right from first paragraph, it does an amazing job of grabing the reader by the genitals squeezing out the good stuff. I've never known quite how to approach "bad ass" games like Contra: Shattered Soldier, but Drella sets up a paradigm here that is both intiutive and functional -- brute force your way through it. The main appeal of this game is clearly its over-the-top action sequences, and Drella does a great job of matching his style to the subject at hand. He even manages to work in the game's faults with such brutual honest that they are rendered mute, which is certainly a difficult feat to achieve. I think this is one of the best reviews that have been posted for this tournament-thing.

PAJ89's review is a lot more conventional, so perhaps I should have read it before Drella's. It's the type of thing I'd want on the front page of this site as an example of how one should write a solid, traditional review. No outlandish puns, no jokes, no experimentation, no self-reflexivity -- just one person, one game, and some text describing the game for the purpose of consumer information. This is a problem for me because I tend to like reviews that do something radically different (and do it well). I actually read reviews more for my own amusement rather than learning whether or not I should purchase a game, and in this sense Drella's review appealed a lot more to my tastes.

---

Goldenvortex vs Espiga
Winner: Vorty

This was an easy choice. And by easy I mean not easy at all. Espiga's review is an easy read, well reasoned, not overlong, not underlong, not superfluous, and of overall high quality. Vorty's framing does a good job of putting his subject into context, the tone is consistent throughout, and it doesn't really lose steam anywhere.

So what thing am I going to nit-pick to differentiate these reviews so I can get out of here and go back to doing whatever it was that I was doing before I got lost wondering the internet? Ordinarily, I'd go after Vorty for a typo at the beginning of the 7th paragraph -- but instead I'm going to go after Espiga, because he uses those one-liner paragraphs that really irrate me. He used four of them, whereas Vorty only made one typo (that I saw). Four is greater than one, thus mathematically I have to pick Vorty.

I think I already regret my vote. Could one of you please edit your review to make it suck? It would make our lives a lot easier.

---

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.

Drella and Espiga. I'll write critiques later, I promise.

---

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

WINNER: DRELLA
Drella's review was entertaining, but not his best. The review was at its strongest when it was detailing the kind of wacky scenarios present in Edward Randy. Fortunately, this took up most of the review. These moments are described with wonderfully engaging writing that really sells Edward Randy as a crazy, crazy experience. I didn't even mind the list, because it added to the impression that the game is bursting with ideas. I thought that the introduction set this approach up well -- the Jackson Pollock reference was a clever way to establish the game's imaginative ambition. However, I thought the "if I ended it here" transition was awkward. The last three paragraphs felt tacked on. It's almost as if drella couldn't fit the gameplay information in earlier and so tacks it on at the end. The review therefore feels unbalanced. However, the first two thirds are strong enough to secure the win. PAJ's review is decent. The writing is solid and the game is covered well, but I think the 5/10 score created a tone of indifference. The result is that this review feels a bit dull, whereas drella's is more creative and entertaining.

WINNER: ESPIGA
I really liked espiga's review. The introduction was entertaining, and establishes the idea that although Two Worlds is generic, it's not awful. Aside from the bit about the heavily flawed online experience, this is the review's only real argument. But I thought that this was enough. I hate to use the dreaded phrase "this review flowed well", but well, it did. The examples lead on from each other in a structured and amusing way, and even the bit about being good or bad added weight to the review. So yeah, this was a succinct and amusing review, which is an achievement, as 4 or 5/10 RPG reviews usually tend to be as dull as the game. Golden Vortex's review wasn't bad, but I don't buy the "without Splatterhouse there would be no survival horror" routine, and this review didn't sell it particularly well anyway. There are some good lines here, but it felt too brief to really do the game justice. Espiga, on the other hand, probably wrote the same amount, but managed to give a more thorough impression of what it is like to play Two Worlds.

---

"fuck yeah oblivion" - Jihad

Yo! How much time are we gonna have for this stage of this round? I'm just finishing up a big work-type project today and likely won't have time to pass judgment until tomorrow. I could make time to do so today if I HAD to, but it'd be a lot easier for me to hold off for one more day.

---

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

Leroux vs. PAJ[insert numbers here]
Winner: Leroux

This was a pretty easy match to judge. The tennis review is pretty lost on someone that has no interest in sports whatsoever. While it was technically sound and I didn't see any flaws in the writing itself, it was dull compared to Leroux's action packed, energetic writing that got me pumped for the game, despite the fact I'll never play it. But, Leroux made me regret that I won't be playing it, and that says a lot about how good of a review it is.

Goldenvortex vs. Some douche
Winner: EmP

...Because he talked me into joining this silly thing at the last minute. ='[

---

Your girlfriend's name ends in .jpg

DRELLA vs. PAJ89
Some may call this blasphemy (possibly including myself), but I think Edward Randy would kick the shit out of Earnest Evans. And this review did a good job of making me come to that crazy idea. I mean, this game sounds completely insane and over-the-top with a ton of obscenely goofy ideas that somehow work to create a pretty exhilarating game. Sweet review for a game I'd never heard of, man. You did a good job in describing some of the more memorable scenes from the game and I really liked the tone of this review. While PAJ89's review was very sound and a good read, it just couldn't compare to Drella's. I can't really point out anything negative about your review, but while Drella's inspired my imagination, this review for a tennis game couldn't accomplish that. Like I said, this is a very good review -- you were just stuck against an imaginative and entertaining review from one of the RC's more acclaimed writers.
WINNER: DRELLA

VORTY vs. ESPIGA
This was one of the better reviews I've ever read by Vorty. And that it sticks out in my mind as so is noteworthy, as over the years, a few really good writers have tackled Splatterhouse. The imagery here is good, doing the subject matter justice. And the occasional touch of humor (like the Spinal Tap bit) fit in well. But, Espiga made this a very tricky decision with a well-written review for a blah RPG. A lot of times when a person writes about a blah game, they write a blah review, but this one had a good deal of personality. I liked the lines about how all the wolves look the same, but they're different because the game says so and how you can't even kill everything because the game brings townspeople back to life. By a narrow margin, I have to give this one to Vorty, though. For some reason, the online part of the review didn't click...possibly because I've never online RPGed and the concept's never interested me or, more likely, because overall, I kinda felt this was two mini-reviews as opposed to one game review.
WINNER: VORTY

Oh, and for my HG-JC critiques, jus' so you two don't feel sad, forlorn and left out. As you may recall, I picked Cairo as the winner.

I really liked both of these reviews. Jason Venter gave me a huge belly-laugh by comparing himself to Jason Bourne, but that wasn't the main strength of this review. One thing I love is when a writer can tackle a real or perceived flaw of a game and legit make me think it's not a flaw. Jason does this well when he tackles things like the short length of the game, by saying it has tons of replay value and six hours or not, he wound up spending more time with it than games with a much longer duration. That's a great point right there and the highlight of a very good review for me. Unfortunately, if there's one kind of review I really like above all others, it's a great bash review especially when the writer can just decimate a hyped game. This is a long review, but consistently entertaining. Nothing like reading about a stealth game that seems a lot more fun, hectic and easy when you forego stealth and just slaughter anyone who gets in your way. You put out a laundry list of questionable and laughable aspects of this game and let your writing speak for itself here. This was just one fun review, which is why I picked it.

---

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

Give me 24 hours, and you'll get my verdicts.

---

PAJ beats Drella
Espiga beats Vorty

I'm too lazy to talk about the Espiga-Vorty match, partly because a lot of the points I want to make have been made above. I'll talk a bit about the PAJ-Drella, though, since I'm in the minority:

I liked both reviews, but I went for PAJ's (only just), because I found it more accessible to read and more informative, and went for those qualities instead of the more refreshing approach Drella brought into his review. PAJ's is perhaps a little out of place for a contest submission, but it's still a solid 'traditional' review--telling me everything I need to know in a straightforward manner. The fact that I happen to follow (men's) tennis and have Virtua Tennis 3 and Top Spin 3 for my Xbox might have helped his cause. While Drella's was well written and I was hooked to start off with, I was feeling a little bored by the time I reached the bullet points, and I was glad that the final few paragraphs decided to focus on more of the gameplay elements rather than continuously paint vivid and ridiculous scenarios.

---

...

DRELLA vs. PAJ89

There’s not a lot I can really say that’s not already been said. There’s nothing wrong with PAJ’s review, and it’s almost refreshing to read something that focuses purely on the game, and why you might and might not like it. Drella, however, opens up with probably his strongest effort since he’s produced since he returned with a repackaged persona. It’s funny, well-written and still manages to inform you on his choice of game just as well as PAJ does. Good showing from both guys.

WINNER: DRELLA

VORTY vs. ESPIGA

I remember judging this Splatterhouse review for something or other that I probably nagged Vorty into in the first pace, and I recall saying then that I didn’t buy into the whole “Splatterhouse birthed horror titles” vibes, and the review didn’t even try to convince me otherwise. On the other hand, all I knew about Two Worlds was that it sucked arse, and Espiga didmanage to sway my view on this, I enjoyed botn reviews greatly, but this is the one aspect I feel sets them apart.

WINNER: ESPIGA

---

For us. For them. For you.

RESULTS:

Espiga: 4 vs Vorty: 3
Drella: 7 vs PAJ89: 1

CLOSED

---

For us. For them. For you.