The "PC Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Yep that's right, there's been scores of these starting up, but all have failed. Let's make this thread a place for PC gamers to chat. Post anything you like in here, comments, reviews, but no spam please.
OK, lets keep this going gamers. For beige box and country!!
Or something like that. :)
OK, lets keep this going gamers. For beige box and country!!
Or something like that. :)
Page:
Little Hobbo wrote:
> OK, so giving your own personal viewpoint on how you found the game to
> play. Right, thanks for pointing out things like that, I want to
> finely hone my writing skills. Not that I'll ever achieve the lofty
> standards of Goatboy though, he really is a master of wordiness. :)
I think writing your own viewpoint does help greatly towards wining a GAD, but like I said before, you don't need to include it. Still it helps. I haven't seen any of Goatboy's reviews, so I'll check some of them out and see if I can get any ideas for future reviews.
> The only hint I can give you is to get someone else to proof-read your
> reviews before you post them, you spelt 'whether' as weather. Also
> beat em up should be beat-em-up. Only being pernickety mind you, :)
> Its very good.
I haven't ever given my review to someone else to proof-read it, but thanks for telling me, it's something I'll do next time I write a review and hopefully get some tips from it.
Ah my spelling, from my early days as a member of the SR forums, I always seemed to get confused with words like weather and whether, they sound the same but mean different things. I can tell the difference now though, and I always put my review through the spell check in word before I post it. It helps deal with all those other embarrassing spelling mistakes.
> Thanks again for your help.
No problem, glad I could help.
> Groo, that pastie was awful, I don't feel too good. :(
You should go for the meat and potato pasty from Gregg's, 'the' best pasties every in my opinion. Jeez, now I feel hungry :)
> OK, so giving your own personal viewpoint on how you found the game to
> play. Right, thanks for pointing out things like that, I want to
> finely hone my writing skills. Not that I'll ever achieve the lofty
> standards of Goatboy though, he really is a master of wordiness. :)
I think writing your own viewpoint does help greatly towards wining a GAD, but like I said before, you don't need to include it. Still it helps. I haven't seen any of Goatboy's reviews, so I'll check some of them out and see if I can get any ideas for future reviews.
> The only hint I can give you is to get someone else to proof-read your
> reviews before you post them, you spelt 'whether' as weather. Also
> beat em up should be beat-em-up. Only being pernickety mind you, :)
> Its very good.
I haven't ever given my review to someone else to proof-read it, but thanks for telling me, it's something I'll do next time I write a review and hopefully get some tips from it.
Ah my spelling, from my early days as a member of the SR forums, I always seemed to get confused with words like weather and whether, they sound the same but mean different things. I can tell the difference now though, and I always put my review through the spell check in word before I post it. It helps deal with all those other embarrassing spelling mistakes.
> Thanks again for your help.
No problem, glad I could help.
> Groo, that pastie was awful, I don't feel too good. :(
You should go for the meat and potato pasty from Gregg's, 'the' best pasties every in my opinion. Jeez, now I feel hungry :)
cipro wrote:
> The game play is the main issue here as it always take precedent over
> graphics. First things first, many will see the game play as a
> turn-off due to the repetitive nature of it, the game sees you beating
> up any enemy soldier on screen with little use for any tactics. I also
> had my doubts when I first saw this game and wasn’t really sure
> weather or not it would be worth it, but after I tried a demo I became
> instantly hooked. I don’t know why I find this game so fun, I’ve spent
> hours replaying the huge levels just repeating the same mindless
> fighting over and over again. The best explanation I can give for this
> is that I loved Streets of Rage on the mega drive and again spent
> hours replaying the levels repeating the same tasks. Dynasty Warriors
> 2 is very much the same as that beat em up classic only on a much
> wider scale.
OK, so giving your own personal viewpoint on how you found the game to play. Right, thanks for pointing out things like that, I want to finely hone my writing skills. Not that I'll ever achieve the lofty standards of Goatboy though, he really is a master of wordiness. :)
The only hint I can give you is to get someone else to proof-read your reviews before you post them, you spelt 'whether' as weather. Also beat em up should be beat-em-up. Only being pernickety mind you, :) Its very good.
Thanks again for your help.
Groo, that pastie was awful, I don't feel too good. :(
> The game play is the main issue here as it always take precedent over
> graphics. First things first, many will see the game play as a
> turn-off due to the repetitive nature of it, the game sees you beating
> up any enemy soldier on screen with little use for any tactics. I also
> had my doubts when I first saw this game and wasn’t really sure
> weather or not it would be worth it, but after I tried a demo I became
> instantly hooked. I don’t know why I find this game so fun, I’ve spent
> hours replaying the huge levels just repeating the same mindless
> fighting over and over again. The best explanation I can give for this
> is that I loved Streets of Rage on the mega drive and again spent
> hours replaying the levels repeating the same tasks. Dynasty Warriors
> 2 is very much the same as that beat em up classic only on a much
> wider scale.
OK, so giving your own personal viewpoint on how you found the game to play. Right, thanks for pointing out things like that, I want to finely hone my writing skills. Not that I'll ever achieve the lofty standards of Goatboy though, he really is a master of wordiness. :)
The only hint I can give you is to get someone else to proof-read your reviews before you post them, you spelt 'whether' as weather. Also beat em up should be beat-em-up. Only being pernickety mind you, :) Its very good.
Thanks again for your help.
Groo, that pastie was awful, I don't feel too good. :(
Little Hobbo wrote:
> I'm off to get a jumbo pastie now, see you this afternoon.
See you later.
> I'm off to get a jumbo pastie now, see you this afternoon.
See you later.
Little Hobbo wrote:
> You could have perhaps added more about how you yourself found the
> game in terms of gameplay ect.. (I think it helps a bit), but it
> isn't
> vital that you do.
>
> Can you explain this a bit further?
Well, it's like writing the review about how you found the game overall, and how you think it holds up. Many reviews stick to the 'I fink this game is gweat' nonsense or tend to be reviewed like critics, What I'm trying to say is it helps reviewing a game like a gamer and not someone who's desperately trying to win GAD.
Not that that I was directing the last line at you, it just seems there are alot of reviews which follow this trend. Anyway, I've got an example of what I'm trying to explain down below, it's taken from the review I did of dynasty warriors 2 which was my first review to win GAD. I think this paragraph helped me win.
The game play is the main issue here as it always take precedent over graphics. First things first, many will see the game play as a turn-off due to the repetitive nature of it, the game sees you beating up any enemy soldier on screen with little use for any tactics. I also had my doubts when I first saw this game and wasn’t really sure weather or not it would be worth it, but after I tried a demo I became instantly hooked. I don’t know why I find this game so fun, I’ve spent hours replaying the huge levels just repeating the same mindless fighting over and over again. The best explanation I can give for this is that I loved Streets of Rage on the mega drive and again spent hours replaying the levels repeating the same tasks. Dynasty Warriors 2 is very much the same as that beat em up classic only on a much wider scale.
> You could have perhaps added more about how you yourself found the
> game in terms of gameplay ect.. (I think it helps a bit), but it
> isn't
> vital that you do.
>
> Can you explain this a bit further?
Well, it's like writing the review about how you found the game overall, and how you think it holds up. Many reviews stick to the 'I fink this game is gweat' nonsense or tend to be reviewed like critics, What I'm trying to say is it helps reviewing a game like a gamer and not someone who's desperately trying to win GAD.
Not that that I was directing the last line at you, it just seems there are alot of reviews which follow this trend. Anyway, I've got an example of what I'm trying to explain down below, it's taken from the review I did of dynasty warriors 2 which was my first review to win GAD. I think this paragraph helped me win.
The game play is the main issue here as it always take precedent over graphics. First things first, many will see the game play as a turn-off due to the repetitive nature of it, the game sees you beating up any enemy soldier on screen with little use for any tactics. I also had my doubts when I first saw this game and wasn’t really sure weather or not it would be worth it, but after I tried a demo I became instantly hooked. I don’t know why I find this game so fun, I’ve spent hours replaying the huge levels just repeating the same mindless fighting over and over again. The best explanation I can give for this is that I loved Streets of Rage on the mega drive and again spent hours replaying the levels repeating the same tasks. Dynasty Warriors 2 is very much the same as that beat em up classic only on a much wider scale.
I'm off to get a jumbo pastie now, see you this afternoon.
cipro wrote:
> Read your review and I think its good, I like it. It's far more
> origanal then the usual 'this game is gweat, go out and by it now'. I
> also liked the first bit of the review where you could score the game
> yourself, it was a good addition.
I'm trying this out in the hope that it's sheer difference will make it a winner. You are right, all reviews seem to take basically the same format, so I'm seeing whether it is a good thing to change it or not.
> You could have perhaps added more about how you yourself found the
> game in terms of gameplay ect.. (I think it helps a bit), but it isn't
> vital that you do.
Can you explain this a bit further?
Overall I'd say its a great review, and probably in
> with a good chance.
Here's hoping.
*Crosses fingers*
:)
> Read your review and I think its good, I like it. It's far more
> origanal then the usual 'this game is gweat, go out and by it now'. I
> also liked the first bit of the review where you could score the game
> yourself, it was a good addition.
I'm trying this out in the hope that it's sheer difference will make it a winner. You are right, all reviews seem to take basically the same format, so I'm seeing whether it is a good thing to change it or not.
> You could have perhaps added more about how you yourself found the
> game in terms of gameplay ect.. (I think it helps a bit), but it isn't
> vital that you do.
Can you explain this a bit further?
Overall I'd say its a great review, and probably in
> with a good chance.
Here's hoping.
*Crosses fingers*
:)
Little Hobbo wrote:
> Yeh, they are a lot easier to win than posts aren't they. I've
> written loadsa posts and won nothing, yet I won with my very first
> review. I've just entered a review today as well, Serious Sam: the
> Second Encounter. Could you check it out and tell me what you think
> of it? I need some feedback as to where my weak points are in writing
> and reviewing.
Read your review and I think its good, I like it. It's far more origanal then the usual 'this game is gweat, go out and by it now'. I also liked the first bit of the review where you could score the game yourself, it was a good addition.
You could have perhaps added more about how you yourself found the game in terms of gameplay ect.. (I think it helps a bit), but it isn't vital that you do. Overall I'd say its a great review, and probably in with a good chance.
> Yeh, they are a lot easier to win than posts aren't they. I've
> written loadsa posts and won nothing, yet I won with my very first
> review. I've just entered a review today as well, Serious Sam: the
> Second Encounter. Could you check it out and tell me what you think
> of it? I need some feedback as to where my weak points are in writing
> and reviewing.
Read your review and I think its good, I like it. It's far more origanal then the usual 'this game is gweat, go out and by it now'. I also liked the first bit of the review where you could score the game yourself, it was a good addition.
You could have perhaps added more about how you yourself found the game in terms of gameplay ect.. (I think it helps a bit), but it isn't vital that you do. Overall I'd say its a great review, and probably in with a good chance.
cipro wrote:
> Another review of Time Crisis 2 this time. I find them easier to win
> GADs as apposed to posts in the forum.
Yeh, they are a lot easier to win than posts aren't they. I've written loadsa posts and won nothing, yet I won with my very first review. I've just entered a review today as well, Serious Sam: the Second Encounter. Could you check it out and tell me what you think of it? I need some feedback as to where my weak points are in writing and reviewing.
> Another review of Time Crisis 2 this time. I find them easier to win
> GADs as apposed to posts in the forum.
Yeh, they are a lot easier to win than posts aren't they. I've written loadsa posts and won nothing, yet I won with my very first review. I've just entered a review today as well, Serious Sam: the Second Encounter. Could you check it out and tell me what you think of it? I need some feedback as to where my weak points are in writing and reviewing.
Little Hobbo wrote:
> cipro wrote:
>
> And I am 18 years old, 19 this agust.
>
> I somehow imagined you as a middle-aged fat bloke. Don't ask me
> why... :D
heh, its partly true for some people here though.
I don't know who exactly, but there are some people here in their late twenty's, early thirty's, and some are even married and have children. Not me though, marrige and kids for me are a long way off.
> cipro wrote:
>
> And I am 18 years old, 19 this agust.
>
> I somehow imagined you as a middle-aged fat bloke. Don't ask me
> why... :D
heh, its partly true for some people here though.
I don't know who exactly, but there are some people here in their late twenty's, early thirty's, and some are even married and have children. Not me though, marrige and kids for me are a long way off.
cipro wrote:
> I suppose it will be worth it then. Its just I personnaly couldn't
> part with so much cash, I'm a little tight fisted when it comes to
> spending large amounts of money.
Same here. So I have a girlfriend to spend my money for me. If I didn't have her, I'd be rich.
Hmmm... wait a miinute...
> I suppose it will be worth it then. Its just I personnaly couldn't
> part with so much cash, I'm a little tight fisted when it comes to
> spending large amounts of money.
Same here. So I have a girlfriend to spend my money for me. If I didn't have her, I'd be rich.
Hmmm... wait a miinute...
Page: