- Add Review
- Subscribe
- Nominate
- Submit Media
- RSS
What Is Everyone Smoking?
- bulmabriefs144
- 12/08/2016 02:54 AM
- 13405 views
So, here's the thing. I'm not necessarily going to agree with all of these other users. And that's okay, because I have my own standards. Every now and then, I have a craving to download a massive amount of games for playtesting. Of course, after wasting hours getting about 60 or so games, typically after only 5 minutes, I toss most of these into the trash. Yes, literally, 5 minutes. No, I'm not gonna put in screenshots because I figure any game that's good, I am still playing even after the review, and will not waste time scouting pictures, and if it didn't make the cut, I am not bothering adding pictures.
The most common reason? It's generic. I could compare hunting for games like picking flowers, there are a ton of ordinary flowers, but somewhere in the field there is one that stands out, either because it is good or very very bad.
Now, as I say, I have my own standards. What are these standards, you might ask? They are:
I will give examples of these. Some of the games I actually have played more than 5 minutes are Love And War (fairly original story and the character development is well flushed out, plus it's funny), Pocket Quest! (Pretty much all categories, and I don't even speak Italian/Portuguese), Touhou Wandering Souls (Visual Interest, Mechanics, and Repeatability thought to a Touhou outsider, the characters were weak), Sunset over Imdahl (visual interest & original story), Forever's End (original story, character development, and the mechanics).
Could I do this myself? No. I cannot paint like this. (Check)
Character Development? Yes. The first five minutes, we get a sense of what our main character is like just from the dad talking. The two supports are at odds with the traditional expectations of angels and demons.
Original Story? Well, not completely. It is vaguely reminiscent of Okami, but definitely not YET ANOTHER FREAKING demon attack or kingdom and castle adventure.
Mechanics? Well, I guess it has its own battle mechanics. I suppose this counts, as does the whole painting the world thing.
Visual Interest? Holy crap. It looks like they hand painted the opening credits. Oh, and I like the music.
If I had to critique anything to bring it short of a perfect five, here it is. The arrow in the battle diagram would be slightly less confusing if it said Weak, and pointed the other way.
It's been over 5 minutes. I'm still playing.
Update: I got to the point where there were a bunch of statues (the hero, the fat priest, the one based on your pet angel, the fountain, and a few others). I couldn't figure out how to continue, but I enjoyed it up to that point. The rock-paper-scissors nature of the battles was fun, and it not that difficult to figure out, the lever puzzles were fun and not terribly hard, and I found item drops just enough to be challenging. I liked the fact that your painter could be damaged with some mass spells, making you need to heal, but the challenge was also not insane (well, I chose the easier challenge rating). It was a good game, I'm marking it down only because it wasn't clear at the point I got what I was supposed to paint.
The most common reason? It's generic. I could compare hunting for games like picking flowers, there are a ton of ordinary flowers, but somewhere in the field there is one that stands out, either because it is good or very very bad.
Now, as I say, I have my own standards. What are these standards, you might ask? They are:
- Visual interest (does it look like every single other game out there or does it catch my eye)
- Mechanics (more than just pretty pictures, if the battles are using the default system, if it is in every way a typical top-down with no HUD, I'm already getting bored)
- Original Story (Does the story seem derivative or not?)
- Character Development (Regardless of whether I like the character in question, are they well developed?)
- Repeatability (This one is hard to define, think of it as "Could I make this game myself?")
I will give examples of these. Some of the games I actually have played more than 5 minutes are Love And War (fairly original story and the character development is well flushed out, plus it's funny), Pocket Quest! (Pretty much all categories, and I don't even speak Italian/Portuguese), Touhou Wandering Souls (Visual Interest, Mechanics, and Repeatability thought to a Touhou outsider, the characters were weak), Sunset over Imdahl (visual interest & original story), Forever's End (original story, character development, and the mechanics).
Could I do this myself? No. I cannot paint like this. (Check)
Character Development? Yes. The first five minutes, we get a sense of what our main character is like just from the dad talking. The two supports are at odds with the traditional expectations of angels and demons.
Original Story? Well, not completely. It is vaguely reminiscent of Okami, but definitely not YET ANOTHER FREAKING demon attack or kingdom and castle adventure.
Mechanics? Well, I guess it has its own battle mechanics. I suppose this counts, as does the whole painting the world thing.
Visual Interest? Holy crap. It looks like they hand painted the opening credits. Oh, and I like the music.
If I had to critique anything to bring it short of a perfect five, here it is. The arrow in the battle diagram would be slightly less confusing if it said Weak, and pointed the other way.
It's been over 5 minutes. I'm still playing.
Update: I got to the point where there were a bunch of statues (the hero, the fat priest, the one based on your pet angel, the fountain, and a few others). I couldn't figure out how to continue, but I enjoyed it up to that point. The rock-paper-scissors nature of the battles was fun, and it not that difficult to figure out, the lever puzzles were fun and not terribly hard, and I found item drops just enough to be challenging. I liked the fact that your painter could be damaged with some mass spells, making you need to heal, but the challenge was also not insane (well, I chose the easier challenge rating). It was a good game, I'm marking it down only because it wasn't clear at the point I got what I was supposed to paint.
Posts
What you're missing, OldPat, was that (1) it took alot longer than 5 mins to get stuck, (2) I value design and creativity over being technically correct.
Why was the Elder Scrolls series so successful? Was it because it used the tried-and-true leveling system? Or was it because it developed its OWN leveling system? Was it because it was perfectly designed? Heck no, I have played Daggerfall (bug ridden) and Oblivion (actually sent my video card to oblivion, turning my display black). But it was a satisfying concept which played to its strengths (open-sandbox, NPCs, and quests).
So, people who disagree with this view are of course entitled to their opinions. But their opinions apparently are garbage, as they don't understand things like art or culture. You are welcome to call it a "hissy fit" but honestly I don't care enough about them to get more than marginally upset.
Art/Culture is to innovate, to edify, to teach. If you play "follow the leader" and "you must do it this way", better to never create anything. You are then not creating, you are streamlining. Such a thing should not be awarded 5/5 anything. That's... like giving 100 on a paper for spelling or agreeing with the teacher. No. The point of the paper is to assert fully developed thoughts and/or to persuade. Past about 5th grade, if your teacher is grading on being grammatically perfect rather than original thought or such, your teacher is a hack.
If you make a game, for chrissake do something different. Whether it's trying to cobble together turn-based combat on a system that doesn't know how to do it, or making your own graphic system, or making a compelling story that is so weird or edgy that it changes the way we think, this is 5/5 material. Not a knockoff of zelda or mario or yume nikki (God, I hate yume nikki knockoffs).
I forcibly hid every post by Liberty's, yours, and Dargnfly's. Which oddly enough was extremely satisfying. I even did an evil laugh while doing it.
Your nacho popcorn, milord. Much better than boring butter or caramel.
Why was the Elder Scrolls series so successful? Was it because it used the tried-and-true leveling system? Or was it because it developed its OWN leveling system? Was it because it was perfectly designed? Heck no, I have played Daggerfall (bug ridden) and Oblivion (actually sent my video card to oblivion, turning my display black). But it was a satisfying concept which played to its strengths (open-sandbox, NPCs, and quests).
So, people who disagree with this view are of course entitled to their opinions. But their opinions apparently are garbage, as they don't understand things like art or culture. You are welcome to call it a "hissy fit" but honestly I don't care enough about them to get more than marginally upset.
Art/Culture is to innovate, to edify, to teach. If you play "follow the leader" and "you must do it this way", better to never create anything. You are then not creating, you are streamlining. Such a thing should not be awarded 5/5 anything. That's... like giving 100 on a paper for spelling or agreeing with the teacher. No. The point of the paper is to assert fully developed thoughts and/or to persuade. Past about 5th grade, if your teacher is grading on being grammatically perfect rather than original thought or such, your teacher is a hack.
If you make a game, for chrissake do something different. Whether it's trying to cobble together turn-based combat on a system that doesn't know how to do it, or making your own graphic system, or making a compelling story that is so weird or edgy that it changes the way we think, this is 5/5 material. Not a knockoff of zelda or mario or yume nikki (God, I hate yume nikki knockoffs).
I forcibly hid every post by Liberty's, yours, and Dargnfly's. Which oddly enough was extremely satisfying. I even did an evil laugh while doing it.
Your nacho popcorn, milord. Much better than boring butter or caramel.
I thought I was reading a review. Then, for a moment, it looked like some kind of random post to me, like a status update of some sort. Then I realized it really was a review. Well, uh... a strange review that is but it's fine, I suppose? Although I really don't know anything about the game, yet. Except the fact I could get stuck after 5 minutes in. That's...
That's all I know about the game after reading your review really. I don't feel like downloading the game after reading this. You gave an almost perfect 5 star without explaining why. Since you liked the game that much, the least you could do is explain WHY you liked it in order to convince whoever reads your review to play it.
Also what's up with the hidden posts? What am I missing? WHERE ARE THY POP CORNS?
That's all I know about the game after reading your review really. I don't feel like downloading the game after reading this. You gave an almost perfect 5 star without explaining why. Since you liked the game that much, the least you could do is explain WHY you liked it in order to convince whoever reads your review to play it.
Also what's up with the hidden posts? What am I missing? WHERE ARE THY POP CORNS?
So...the answer is to throw a hissy fit and hide posts?
author=Liberty
So... you couldn't finish the game but decided to give it almost full stars even though it was impossible for you to complete? Definitely computes. :/
Also, you don't really say much more than "This is good, this is good, yeah this is good. I've been playing for longer than 5 minutes... 4.5 stars."
You don't even talk about the game much at all. You talk, instead, about lots of other games and how you don't like x or y in games than you do about this game. I dunno, this seems like you just made a review to counter the scores of previous reviews without actually bothering to write a proper review.
For faults you don't mention the parts where you can see the tilesets behind the graphics pasted on top or about how disingenous some of the puzzles are or how battles are highly unbalanced, which are all issues in the game. Then again, that seems to be the core issue in your review. You don't really say anything about the game.
You don't talk about the battle system at all or anything outside of the battle system like the puzzles or the story or the like. Anything you do touch on is a one-liner that boils down to "It's just good just cos" and "yeah, i like this" or "I can't do this so it's good".
This is a pretty meh review, sorry. Perhaps go back and add some extra information about what you liked about the game giving examples and why they work. I mean, I get that you like the game but you haven't really told us what you liked about it really.
As it stands, it reads as more of a reactionary review to pump the score up after arguing against the lower stars it got from other reviewers. Overall I give this review 2/5 stars.
Yeah, guess what. Not everyone has your "standards." I see this every single day on this board. A person puts their heart and soul into a project. They waste weeks or months on it. They come up with their own engine, their own battle mechanics, their own system. They bother to explain it. "You spent too long on tutorial!" Wtf? It needed tutorial. "It seems disconnected from the rules of RPGs." Yeah, stuff your rules. They just made their own. Do you have any idea how many for-profit games I have seen in the last year that I wouldn't even pay one red cent for? This game, I honestly just can't solve a puzzle. If I could, I would keep playing. In fact, if I could pay money for this game, I would. Not only is the art unique vs YET ANOTHER borrowed chipset, not only were the puzzles fun to do, and the plot interesting, but I enjoyed the battles all of them. I don't know what your criticism is about, but he doesn't need it, and neither does he need to follow your rules. Nor do I. They don't exist.
Having seen alot of the same people make these standards on what constitutes a 4.5 star game, I have found very few of the 5 stars engaging (one of them was downright ugly to my eyes), and many many of them formulaic and annoying to look at. Of the 5 stars that have a download, telling it to exclude commercial games, Umbral Soul might be okay. Phantom Legacy was good, and mostly challenging to play, but I don't know about 5 stars. I played Blank Dream and Lavender, couldn't become engaged. Super Mario RPG was something I should have liked, but for a reason I can't remember, I couldn't. Possibly because I preferred the SNES Mario RPG graphics to the rather washed out GB graphics. No One Has To Die looks vaguely interesting, but not 5 star in concept or graphics. Quest Twilight Prince Prophecy Chronicles, haven't played it, but oh yes definitely yes, I want to assign this one a 5 star. Any of the Yume Nikki knockoffs? No. Valthirian Arc II, yes. Because this is MY taste.
These reviews? They're opinions. Potentially quality games like the 10th Line get trash unrated (that's a ZERO star, btw) reviews. Assigning fake standards to games just makes all games identical. And that is exact the problem, such games are the very antithesis of quality, effectively enforcing mediocrity. Game has problems? Maybe. Do I like it? Yes. 4.5, and that's final.
Let's criticize the "critics" here. What about your games? I won't play them. That's right. I will not even get to the download stage. They are well-drawn, by-the-book, all-the-art-in-the-right-place, and you failed on the most basic part of game design. Rule #1: Show us your heart and soul. I only see design here. Sorry. Your notes menu on Where End Times Saddest (etc) is the least pretty thing of the images shown. It's also the most real because I can tell it is homemade.
Why did I give this game 4.5 stars? Because it is everything your games are not, and I stand by this decision. The rest of you losers can go home, I'm muting all other comments. Largely because it turns out to be fun. That's why we play games. This game is different, that game is fun, the other teaches us something about ourselves. Formula games don't do this, only original concepts do.
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
I remember when I put my first review in I got denied over and over again before it got accepted. Not for this game but still.
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
That's kool, and fair.
Only thing to add is that I would like to remind you that it went through like this, approved by a human hand.
I mean honestly, anyone should be free to give it a try if there's a need or a good reason (like having a very different experience with a game, that's good), but it is not up to the reviewer to say whether it is good enough or not. And so I find it tricky to judge a bigger responsibility.
Not when we know there is some sort of quality control. That's actually what I consider a saving grace for any aspiring reviewer. Not sure if it's good enough? Well, Soli's gonna tell you if you need to fix it up to site standard. I find it very comforting to know.
(sometimes I was like, oh boy, is this gonna get approved? and then it did, haha, even though it wasn't the best of my reviews).
It just feels like barking up the wrong tree to me honestly, so just keep that in mind is all I would ask you to consider. Lots of hugs and love.
I do hope future reviews or an update get some more details.
I suspect because this game has already so many reviews it fits in easier though, and is also easier to approve.
author=unity
I am totally cool with making this place a more friendly place for reviewers, and for not scaring them off. I am also cool with respecting differing opinions. All I'm asking for is effort. I don't think this sets a good example for future hopeful reviewers.
That's kool, and fair.
Only thing to add is that I would like to remind you that it went through like this, approved by a human hand.
I mean honestly, anyone should be free to give it a try if there's a need or a good reason (like having a very different experience with a game, that's good), but it is not up to the reviewer to say whether it is good enough or not. And so I find it tricky to judge a bigger responsibility.
Not when we know there is some sort of quality control. That's actually what I consider a saving grace for any aspiring reviewer. Not sure if it's good enough? Well, Soli's gonna tell you if you need to fix it up to site standard. I find it very comforting to know.
(sometimes I was like, oh boy, is this gonna get approved? and then it did, haha, even though it wasn't the best of my reviews).
It just feels like barking up the wrong tree to me honestly, so just keep that in mind is all I would ask you to consider. Lots of hugs and love.
I do hope future reviews or an update get some more details.
I suspect because this game has already so many reviews it fits in easier though, and is also easier to approve.
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
Anyway there still are four more reviews to read, with people played more than five minutes.
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
Every time I log back into RMN...
Housekeeping, love that razzy title!
Bulma, thanks for spending your time playing PH :) I appreciate the details you added in your update. It's helpful to know that the game direction in the bridge area wasn't clear enough - it shows that I struggle with giving the player enough information to figure out how to proceed, and that's a pretty deadly flaw for any game. I'll definitely work on learning how to better communicate solutions to the player! There are many flaws to this game, but I'm glad you could have a fun experience despite them. Trass came up with all of the battle mechanics, so I'm sure he'll be happy that you found them interesting.
As other people have mentioned, giving very high or very low ratings on a review without a lot of text to explain why can be seen as trying to skew the ratings. I don't think there's anyone who would start a review war over this game, but I would prefer if it weren't a possibility :( A lot of people will use 'no rating' when their review focuses on opinion, and later include their personal rating system in the text, so that's an option if you'd like to avoid some controversy.
I hope you'll also review the rest of the games that you've played and enjoyed :D It's always great if you can tell the developer about your observations such as the things that are good, the things that need some work, and any other stuff you've noticed that developer may not have noticed while making it. For example that the puzzles don't make sense, or that there are graphics mistakes... Like the one Libby mentioned that will forever haunt me for forgetting to fix... T_T
Housekeeping, love that razzy title!
Bulma, thanks for spending your time playing PH :) I appreciate the details you added in your update. It's helpful to know that the game direction in the bridge area wasn't clear enough - it shows that I struggle with giving the player enough information to figure out how to proceed, and that's a pretty deadly flaw for any game. I'll definitely work on learning how to better communicate solutions to the player! There are many flaws to this game, but I'm glad you could have a fun experience despite them. Trass came up with all of the battle mechanics, so I'm sure he'll be happy that you found them interesting.
As other people have mentioned, giving very high or very low ratings on a review without a lot of text to explain why can be seen as trying to skew the ratings. I don't think there's anyone who would start a review war over this game, but I would prefer if it weren't a possibility :( A lot of people will use 'no rating' when their review focuses on opinion, and later include their personal rating system in the text, so that's an option if you'd like to avoid some controversy.
I hope you'll also review the rest of the games that you've played and enjoyed :D It's always great if you can tell the developer about your observations such as the things that are good, the things that need some work, and any other stuff you've noticed that developer may not have noticed while making it. For example that the puzzles don't make sense, or that there are graphics mistakes... Like the one Libby mentioned that will forever haunt me for forgetting to fix... T_T
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
Thanks! XD
Yeah, they've got this as their excuse: "Of course, after wasting hours getting about 60 or so games, typically after only 5 minutes, I toss most of these into the trash. Yes, literally, 5 minutes."
And you know what? Deciding if you're going to keep playing a game or ditch it after five minutes is totally a defend-able position. But just because that makes sense, that doesn't make your five minutes of time worthy of a full review.
Unless you're reviewing a game that lasts only five minutes, a review based on five minutes of playtime will always be lacking. Leave a comment if you want, saying "First five minutes were good! A+!" The fact that they continued to play after five minutes, but had already submitted the review and given the game a definitive score, makes this even more flagrant to me.
EDIT:
I am totally cool with making this place a more friendly place for reviewers, and for not scaring them off. I am also cool with respecting differing opinions. All I'm asking for is effort. I don't think this sets a good example for future hopeful reviewers.
Point. However, I typed this post before I saw your response, so here it is XD; I'll chill for now.
author=pianotm
Oh, I wasn't complaining or criticizing your liberal use of acid in that post. I think you're absolutely right. I'm just saying, your submit button has a mean right hook.
Thanks! XD
author=Marrend
What I don't get is, if this score is any indication, why only play five minutes? Why not play for longer? What happened to make this player/reviewer put the game down after that time?
*Edit: Nevermind. I see it now. Though, I do think the criticisms made against this review are still valid.
Yeah, they've got this as their excuse: "Of course, after wasting hours getting about 60 or so games, typically after only 5 minutes, I toss most of these into the trash. Yes, literally, 5 minutes."
And you know what? Deciding if you're going to keep playing a game or ditch it after five minutes is totally a defend-able position. But just because that makes sense, that doesn't make your five minutes of time worthy of a full review.
Unless you're reviewing a game that lasts only five minutes, a review based on five minutes of playtime will always be lacking. Leave a comment if you want, saying "First five minutes were good! A+!" The fact that they continued to play after five minutes, but had already submitted the review and given the game a definitive score, makes this even more flagrant to me.
EDIT:
author=Kylaila
We're all learning here, and that includes reviewers. There are a lot of people really afraid they can't meet certain standards and never really give it a shot because of this when they'd do just fine. I rather have people growing over time than needing to start out excellent.
I'd just hope bulma is open to explaining his points better and learning some tricks here and there. That's the most important thing that's needed here right now, imho. It looks he did play more than 5 minutes but as valid and real any opinion is, there's little worth in any feedback if it's not explained as to why that is. What is interesting? Why? How?
I am totally cool with making this place a more friendly place for reviewers, and for not scaring them off. I am also cool with respecting differing opinions. All I'm asking for is effort. I don't think this sets a good example for future hopeful reviewers.
author=Kylaila
Anyway, there's enough peeps telling bulma that there is much more he could do to explain stuff. I'd wait for a response before piling on more.
Point. However, I typed this post before I saw your response, so here it is XD; I'll chill for now.
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
This is probably the best advise so far, actually.
author=Kylaila
Anyway, there's enough peeps telling bulma that there is much more he could do to explain stuff. I'd wait for a response before piling on more.
This is probably the best advise so far, actually.
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
Getting stuck. Someone on the main page also replied, so would be nice if he could continue the game and update.
I don't like fiddling around forever most times either, I like to ask cause it saves time and frustration. I usually pause and then continue and then write my review tho.
I get it and I agree there's a lot lacking.
Still, a lot of people will be able to sympathize with where that is coming from - like downloading a buncha games and just seeing how they look like from the first few minutes, for one. And it's good when more people voice their reasonings. There's a reason hyped shows or series' have by far the best first episode or episodes. It is a huge catch. Being unique or standing out from the masses, even just by art direction (look at the download count) is as well.
We're all learning here, and that includes reviewers. There are a lot of people really afraid they can't meet certain standards and never really give it a shot because of this when they'd do just fine. I rather have people growing over time than needing to start out excellent.
I'd just hope bulma is open to explaining his points better and learning some tricks here and there. That's the most important thing that's needed here right now, imho. It looks he did play more than 5 minutes but as valid and real any opinion is, there's little worth in any feedback if it's not explained as to why that is. What is interesting? Why? How?
Knock at Soli's door and say "look.." If it shouldn't be here as is, then it shouldn't be let through before more details were added.
Thankfully there are also multiple reviews available already and you can see if you agree with the reasoning or lack thereof if you are looking to play this game.
Anyway, there's enough peeps telling bulma that there is much more he could do to explain stuff. I'd wait for a response before piling on more.
I don't like fiddling around forever most times either, I like to ask cause it saves time and frustration. I usually pause and then continue and then write my review tho.
I get it and I agree there's a lot lacking.
Still, a lot of people will be able to sympathize with where that is coming from - like downloading a buncha games and just seeing how they look like from the first few minutes, for one. And it's good when more people voice their reasonings. There's a reason hyped shows or series' have by far the best first episode or episodes. It is a huge catch. Being unique or standing out from the masses, even just by art direction (look at the download count) is as well.
We're all learning here, and that includes reviewers. There are a lot of people really afraid they can't meet certain standards and never really give it a shot because of this when they'd do just fine. I rather have people growing over time than needing to start out excellent.
I'd just hope bulma is open to explaining his points better and learning some tricks here and there. That's the most important thing that's needed here right now, imho. It looks he did play more than 5 minutes but as valid and real any opinion is, there's little worth in any feedback if it's not explained as to why that is. What is interesting? Why? How?
Knock at Soli's door and say "look.." If it shouldn't be here as is, then it shouldn't be let through before more details were added.
Thankfully there are also multiple reviews available already and you can see if you agree with the reasoning or lack thereof if you are looking to play this game.
Anyway, there's enough peeps telling bulma that there is much more he could do to explain stuff. I'd wait for a response before piling on more.
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
What I don't get is, if this score is any indication, why only play five minutes? Why not play for longer? What happened to make this player/reviewer put the game down after that time?
*Edit: Nevermind. I see it now. Though, I do think the criticisms made against this review are still valid.
*Edit: Nevermind. I see it now. Though, I do think the criticisms made against this review are still valid.
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
Oh, I wasn't complaining or criticizing your liberal use of acid in that post. I think you're absolutely right. I'm just saying, your submit button has a mean right hook.
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
I generally prefer to be frank and honest, rather than going the sarcastic route, but I really couldn't help myself with the absurdity of the situation.
Look at this review and what happened here. What if this was the norm? This means someone could literally set an egg-timer for five minutes, play a game here on RMN until the timer went off, write a couple of hasty paragraphs, submit the review, and then start the process over with a new game, over and over.
Games don't deserve five-minute-of-playtime reviews. It's insulting to the games and the time the devs put into them.
This may be a 4.5 star review, but Painted Heart deserves much better than this. I speak not in terms of score, but in terms of someone actually looking at the thing they are playing and putting some thought into their review. Someone actually trying and putting forth the minimum effort.
No game deserves this. No dev needs this. This doesn't help anyone.
author=pianotm
@Unity, Damn! Ouch! I even felt that cutting edge!
author=Dragnfly
Sarcastic as heck? Likely. Funny? Certainly. Absolutely true? Sadly.
I generally prefer to be frank and honest, rather than going the sarcastic route, but I really couldn't help myself with the absurdity of the situation.
Look at this review and what happened here. What if this was the norm? This means someone could literally set an egg-timer for five minutes, play a game here on RMN until the timer went off, write a couple of hasty paragraphs, submit the review, and then start the process over with a new game, over and over.
Games don't deserve five-minute-of-playtime reviews. It's insulting to the games and the time the devs put into them.
This may be a 4.5 star review, but Painted Heart deserves much better than this. I speak not in terms of score, but in terms of someone actually looking at the thing they are playing and putting some thought into their review. Someone actually trying and putting forth the minimum effort.
No game deserves this. No dev needs this. This doesn't help anyone.
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
Sarcastic as heck? Likely. Funny? Certainly. Absolutely true? Sadly.
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
@Unity, Damn! Ouch! I even felt that cutting edge!
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
The lesson to learn here for aspiring developers is that all you need to do for a 4+ star game is to hook the player for at least five minutes. The game can literally be unbeatable after that but if the reviewer liked the first five minutes, you're golden!
The lesson to learn here for aspiring reviewers is that five minutes of play followed by a stream of consciousness rant is totally all you need for a good review. No overview, nothing to give potential players any sort of real feeling about what sort of game they're getting in to. Just climb up on your soapbox and slam out a few paragraphs and you're golden!
The lesson to learn here for aspiring reviewers is that five minutes of play followed by a stream of consciousness rant is totally all you need for a good review. No overview, nothing to give potential players any sort of real feeling about what sort of game they're getting in to. Just climb up on your soapbox and slam out a few paragraphs and you're golden!
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
Yeah, it's pretty rough. Thanks for telling us to which point you got.
There is no harm in giving a frame or ranting a bit at all, or saying if you could do it yourself. It doesn't explain much about the game itself, but it does give a frame of where you are coming from.
That said, there is an imbalance in how much you say about the game vs other things, some more examples and explanations of what is fun would be much appreciated (like, what makes it stand out and unique to you? in examples. like color choices or scenery or sth!)
Either way, glad you enjoyed the game! I didn't have as great a time
There is no harm in giving a frame or ranting a bit at all, or saying if you could do it yourself. It doesn't explain much about the game itself, but it does give a frame of where you are coming from.
That said, there is an imbalance in how much you say about the game vs other things, some more examples and explanations of what is fun would be much appreciated (like, what makes it stand out and unique to you? in examples. like color choices or scenery or sth!)
Either way, glad you enjoyed the game! I didn't have as great a time
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
You guys are brutally mean, lol
This post has been hidden by the game developer. Click here to show the post anyway.
Damn. I just realized that my subtitle should have been, "Reviewing Liberty's Painted Heart Review Review." I deserve missing all three of those points.
author=Liberty
7/10 would read again
Damn. I just realized that my subtitle should have been, "Reviewing Liberty's Painted Heart Review Review." I deserve missing all three of those points.