As requested, then:
It's very 'describey'. There's more talk of what there is to do and how it's done than actual discussion of the game's quality, which always bores me a little, but maybe that's just me. It's good that you didn't fall into a checklist pattern of 'gameplay, graphics, sound, value', though.
Elsewhere, it comes across overly wordy, though you have a nice writing style. Careful not to show it off too much: this does read with a little of the pompousness of certain EDGE articles, which is a major turn-off for me.
I did come away from the review feeling like I'd been told "It's ace. This is what you do in the game. 9/10." Not a whole lot of analysis, but your emphasis comes across with how enthusiastically you discuss the features.
It's okay.
It's very 'describey'. There's more talk of what there is to do and how it's done than actual discussion of the game's quality, which always bores me a little, but maybe that's just me. It's good that you didn't fall into a checklist pattern of 'gameplay, graphics, sound, value', though.
Elsewhere, it comes across overly wordy, though you have a nice writing style. Careful not to show it off too much: this does read with a little of the pompousness of certain EDGE articles, which is a major turn-off for me.
I did come away from the review feeling like I'd been told "It's ace. This is what you do in the game. 9/10." Not a whole lot of analysis, but your emphasis comes across with how enthusiastically you discuss the features.
It's okay.