Forums > Contributor Zone > RotW // 18th September – 24th September // The “Joe Didn’t Make It” Edition

Got yourself screwed over by the proof editor, huh? Well, unlucky sunbeam. Maybe next time.

This week had quite a small rota, made up of reviews completely outside of staff. It was all for pretty old games, too, giving the entire thing a nice retro vibe. Still, I’ll work hard finding something to complain about.


THIRD Yume Nikki [PC] maboroshi

I’ve already noted that I liked this review. This remains true, and I remain quite interested in the source material that we’ve collected a little library of on site. I don’t think I’ll ever really get bored of hearing other people’s interpretation of this game. Including this one, which compares it quite cleverly to a creepypasta and offers a small list of fan theories that make no sense to me.

As you acknowledge, the first two paragraphs don’t actually say a lot and, while the review would work just as well without them, they remain pretty harmless. There are a few repeating grammar issues throughout, though. Your biggest offender was that you sometimes quote titles, but your capitalisation for them is completely random. For example, these are correct: Slenderman, The Rake, The SCP Foundation, Yume Nikki. These are not: Linkin park, blue velvet, twin peaks.

It’s a rambley review, but that’s fitting for a game of this nature which is completely subjective and open for consumer interpretation.

Second Portal [PC] by HasteyPixels

Of the reviews submitted this week, this was the best written. Usually that puts you top of the pile in what’s effectively a writing competition, but the focus of this review is awful. I’ll talk more about it in a second, but here’s the go home line: you review Portal without once talking about portals once.

I mean, on a huge stretch, I might have let it go under the pretence that you left that vague so that new players would come to the idea fresh. But a/ everyone knows what Portal is, b/ you go ahead and reveal the GLaDOS heel turn, so you can’t be that fussed about keeping decade old secrets everyone already knows and c/ it’s in the bloody title.

So, what do you talk about in what’s already quite a short review? Something something Youtube, Something something birth of the walking sim? That’s highly debatable. Something something the sequel answers some of the game’s unanswered questions? Of course it does. That’s the entire point of sequels!

When you talk about the game, the bits you do discuss you do so very well. The list of hazards off-handily reeled off was well implemented, for example. But this is definably an instance where you got more carried away by talking around the game rather than at it.

WIN Trespasser [PC] by Bouchart

Bouchart released a handful of retro-flavoured reviews this week, the best of the bunch by some margin belonging to Trespasser. An awful game well broken down by a review that delves into every issue and explains why nothing really works.

The reason this review stood above the rest was because the console games came across as very listy and, while this review does suffer from that kind of stiffness at times, it never falls back on a “the graphics are, the sound is” template. Still, it’s good source material to tear up a bit, so long as you’re brave enough to actually play the game in the first place. So kudos to you for suffering through it.

Talking about how you have to control an arm to do things like pick up weapons is made to sound exactly as clumsy and nonsensical as it is. The shining example being having to move your character back and forth with irritatingly delicate adjustments to do something as mundane as punch in a key code.

There is stiffness present though, as noted, and the last few paragraphs seem to be a rush to fit in the few things you’d forgotten about but felt you had to fit in there somewhere. But this is a good review and an impressive first showing. As a special reward, I adorn your review with screenshots. You’re welcome/don’t expect more!

For us. For them. For you.

Thanks for putting me in there. I do a ton of technical writing which makes being more personable difficult. Plus in terms of capitalization, I tend to ignore it for the most part. What you're seeing is my word processor's autocapitalization. I'm writing mostly to get back into actual writing so the constructive criticism is valuable.

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.

It's my job in these things to be nit-picky and petty. S'what I do.

I spent a chunk of the evening looking up some of the fan theories you mentioned. Other people be crazy.

For us. For them. For you.

Eh. I missed, but there's no guarantee I would've won. Regardless, it's good to see new blood take the crown.

The only thing my milkshake brings to the yard is a subpoena.

I guess it's a balancing act incorporating my experience with a title versus potential spoilers. I admit I wasn't sure quite how to get into it without talking about how I got into it. I really did approach it like the Shrodinger cat experiment. I was a little nervous it might not exist without me.

Sounds strange, I know, but that's the paradox. I also knew hitting this narrative stride wasn't going to be easy. That's a good thing. Thanks for the inclusion. It's very much appreciated, and I've got something to ponder.

Look, the only time I'm not wrong is when I'm right, so...