I started penning this review a good two or three weeks ago when the game first came out. I initially held off on posting it because I wanted to give Titan Studios a chance to fix their online connection issues (which they did).
Once that was done, I was able to go back in and remove the focus from server issues and put it more squarely on the game, which is really what I wanted to do in the first place (but couldn't with a clear conscience as long as I continued to recieve "host is lost" messages every time I wanted to play).
The result I then stewed on for a week more, rereading all the comments I received during the TT and by those who have been trading comments with me as per my offer on the site.
So, this end result has really been tailored by everyone kind enough to leave me feedback over the last couple weeks. I've taken all your advice to heart and I hope it shows. I would, of course, love any feedback on this, especially seeing as how it builds on what you've already told me.
The review will be linked here once it pops up and once I get back from work.
User: aschultz Title: Posted: August 16, 2009 (04:10 PM)
I'm very entertained by your latest effort, but I'm also just curious--why are some of your reviews staff reviews and others not?
User: zippdementia Title: Posted: August 16, 2009 (11:31 PM)
Mostly because I like to be included in the Review of the Week. Also, I can go back and edit user reviews later if I decide they need it. I like having my work be in a constant state of progress.
I try to limit my staff reviews to things that I feel will help Honest Gamers, so newer games. If it's a new game, I'll always do staff review for it. That lets me be a little more experimental with the user reviews, since they're older games that people aren't looking at Honest Gamers to provide a standard review for.
User: randxian Title: Posted: August 16, 2009 (11:43 PM)
Okay, so what's the point of having the "no staff review rule for ROTW" when people do this?
Why not just go ahead and make all reviews, both staff and user, eligible for ROTW?
It just seems weird to have a rule that's apparently so easy to skirt around.
User: honestgamer Title: Posted: August 17, 2009 (12:28 AM)
Zipp is not site staff. He's a freelancer, and any reviews that are posted as staff reviews go through an approval process before they're ever posted as freelance reviews (which appear as staff reviews throughout the site).
User: zippdementia Title: Posted: August 17, 2009 (01:07 AM)
Exactly. What Jason said. It gets a little confusing since freelance reviews are called "staff reviews." There's actually only something like six staff members here at HG and I have neither the experience nor the seniority to be on that list.
User: aschultz Title: Posted: August 17, 2009 (06:07 PM)
Cool, great to hear the explanation. I'd always wondered. In any case, good stuff.
User: sashanan Title: Posted: August 18, 2009 (10:45 PM)
Looking good. As somebody who has never played this and heard only vaguely about it, I can honestly say this gave me a good impression both of the kind of game we're looking at, AND of its pros and cons. Sharp piece.
Spotted one error you'll want to fix:
That's the sort've micro managing strategy Fat Princess' offers gamers.
"Sort of", after all, you weren't looking for the contraction of "sort have".
User: zippdementia Title: Posted: August 19, 2009 (01:54 AM)
Damn my Americaneese. Do you know there are actually books published with that one in it? I make that mistake all the time. I can't fix it this go around, as it is a staff... er, freelance... review, but I'll keep it in mind for the future.
Opinions expressed in this blog represent the opinions of those expressing them and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of site staff, users and/or sponsors. Unless otherwise stated, content above belongs to its copyright holders and may not be reproduced without express written permission.