ALTEREGO'S PROFILE

Ok, so the story was interesting enough to keep you playing, the literacy was surprisingly good, but the overall subject/humor was "fucking retarded", those are the three things you touched upon about writing. Yet, even after admitting your biases shouldn't affect things, you give it a score of 3/10. Does that makes sense to anyone? (This is an honest question)

I don't know, shouldn't it be more like: "Story- Not great, but good enough (That's the very definition of "average" if I've ever heard one): 5/10." "Literacy- Pretty good: 8/10, maybe?" "Subject matter- Hated it, but I should remain neutral on the issue: 5/10." "5+8+5=18/3=6" SIX! Twice as much as you gave it. So maybe your biases played a bigger part than you think...?

Also, one thing is to say something is childish and another to say you shouldn't like that stuff unless you're a child. I bet many people think that way of things you like (including videogames) but that isn't right, is it? Neither is telling someone to avoid that stuff based on that perception alone. I think a game's subject/humor should never be put in such a negative light... If we were talking about actual bigoted/offensive stuff, then maybe, but I doubt some old memes and popular references can have that effect.

author=Corfaisus
If someone were to write in a character that's supposed to be 5 years old, even if this person's spelling isn't top notch on account of inexperience, I wouldn't want for their dialog to reflect that with the inclusion of intentional misspellings.

Why not? How else would you characterize the kid's "inexperience" then? Likewise, if you have a character that stutters a lot or that has a heavy foreign accent, how else would you convey it to your audience if you don't alter their speech patterns? ...I think the key is not to overdo-it. Take Chrono Cross, for example. In that game almost everyone had their own 'speech-impediment' and it was annoying because you had to 'switch gears' every time someone spoke. But in this game is only Pom who speaks on a 'Net' fashion. All the other dogs speak normally, and they get as much 'screen-time' as Pom does. I think that's a fair compromise.

author=Corfaisus
Overall, there's no point in playing this game.

Heh; Is there a point in playing any game? ...Games are entertainment. Their point is to entertain. And this one does that well enough.

author=Avee
If anyone dislikes the fact that this rather unprofessional review got accepted and alters the game's overall score, suck it up. That's how things work here.

Only because we let it be that way? Maybe if we spoke out more often against these reviews, the people in charge would get a clue?
_
Seriously, if only I'd get a penny every time I hear someone excusing a shoddy review as just an "opinion" or a "personal experience". ..Hey, don't take me wrong, there's a place for that kind of expression too, its called: the comments section. If all you want to to do is to rant- Ahem! Sorry. Being "emphatic" about a single aspect of a game, a comment should be enough for that.

A review is more like a formal event, you see? You don't attend wearing only your underwear (Unless you're crashing the event. Or if that's the 'theme' of the event. xD), you suit up all nice and dandy and you try to give the best impression of yourself... In the context of a review, I'd like to call this: Being "objective". Although some people have an issue with that word, so call it however you want, but it implies being thorough, fair, understanding, etc. You're writing for a community, not for some tabloid or your dear diary, so the best interests of that community, and what it stands for, should remain the priority. Reviews are not the place to vent or to make statements.

author=Ronove
The FACT is that there are tons of people who have played my game and never had an issue.

Just to play "Devil's advocate" a little... By this point I think it's a fact TOO that many people have issues with your game. So I don't know, maybe just allow players to pick a difficulty level at the beginning? I don't think this would be too hard to pull-off or even be an attempt on the "artistic integrity" of your game, would it? Many games do it and they're not intrinsically worse because of it; Quite the opposite. If this review brings up a good point is that your work is lost on plenty of people when you only cater to a 'niche' audience.

Edit: Also, there is difficulty and then there is "difficulty". If what I read a couple post above is true, that status ailments often don't land and there's nothing the players can do about it, that's essentially a wasted turn. That's game design 101.

@LockeZ: Those are not entirely fair reasons. Certainly, those contests are not the best environment to create 'quality' products, but is not Ok to hold it against the developers for taking part of them. Also, I think that a game can never truly be considered "complete", but in that regard no game should ever deserve even half a star because there's always almost infinite room for improvement... It is unreasonable to stand by this position from a practical point of view, so many things besides "choice" have to been taken into consideration when judging something, otherwise you're judging them not for what they are, but for what they couldn't be. Link xD

@Link_2112: Heh; It would be enough for most people to increase the score by at least half a point... The thing is, I don't think the lack of more fitting themes can hold down the game that much. Not even the gameplay is that bad. xP

Edit: Presicely. xD RMN holds much, much worse. I think this game deserves at least a 2.5, if you go by the "2.5=Average" scale.

Yeah, 5 stars feels a bit too much. Nevermind the fact that this review seems to read a lot into the "deep" subjects touched upon in the game. (I mean, it's cool the game has a "message", but c'mon), but that there are some things that could have been improved. Little things, mind you, but that for the sake of "perfection" should not be so easily overlooked. *justmytwocents*