Reviews and critiques thread

Can you analyze a video game, Holla Forums? What about a movie, tv series, cartoon?
Can you make your review engaging and concise? Can you make it substanceful and expressive? Show me your vocabulary.

Show me.

It's shit

Came to post this.

This is the the perfect structure of a review:

-Start with a brief history of the developer, past games they've made.

-A brief history of the series, if it's a series, or a brief history of the development of the game if there's anything noteworthy.

-Talk about the setting, story and overall premise here, give context to the game, i know you'd like to get the gameplay here first but you have to think of the average reader, you gotta ease him in.

-Talk about graphics, most people are vapid graphic whores, get this out of the way early so they can get hooked and whoever is interested to the rest keeps going.

-This is the meat of the review, talk about gameplay, at the end of this you can talk about replay value and post endgame content and such.

-Get the sound out of the way here, if you're absolutely deaf and don't know shit about music and sound design (this is Holla Forums, you guys got a certain infamous reputation about this) get someone that actually knows what he's talking about to give you advice, there's no shame in having an expert help you out when you lack in some areas.

-If you've decided not to name all the negative aspects during the review, you can put them here, but generally speaking you should talk about positives and negatives during the review itself.

At the end you can either use a scoring system, or a simple "I recommend this" "I don't recommend this" system.
The "I recommend this" system is more patrician and you can also be more precise (I recommend this to -this audience-).

If you must use a scoring system (Let's say a 1-10 system) the rules are as follows:

1 = Incredibly shitty game with nothing redeeming about it, you should use this for the worst game ever made, otherwise never use this.
2 = Terrible game/a game unplayable because of a huge amount of bugs or other problems.
3 = A bad game that has a couple of interesting things going for it that still makes it worth a try to whoever is interested.
4 = A mediocre game that has some problems bringing it down a notch.
5 = An absolutely mediocre game, not too good, not too bad, industry standard of a playable decent experience (YOU SHOULD NEVER USE A 5 TO SCORE A TRULY BAD GAME, MODERN VIDEO GAME REVIEWS HAVE WARPED YOUR MIND IF YOU THINK THAT'S THE CASE).
6 = A mediocre game that has a couple of elements that make it break off the mold and is worth playing to experience those elements.
7 = A good game that has many non standard, interesting elements.
8 = A GREAT game full of interesting elements that makes it a must play.
9 = An almost GOTY with only a couple of imperfections, a semi perfect game, everyone has to play this (Almost everything Holla Forums considers to be a 10/10 goes here instead).
10 = In your lifetime you will use this 3 times top, this is reserved for genre shattering games that cause you to experience zen like enlightenment, after playing a 10/10 game any other video game will feel like complete shit for a year, your life will become meaningless, you will feel like playing this game was the single greatest moment of your entire existence, it's absolutely ok, and in fact even encouraged, to never use this number if you never find a game that is -that- good, this should be a forbidden number for anything but life changing earth shattering masterpieces.

I could whip out a pretentious overly long analysis of a video game easily. The problem is my voice is shitty.

Where do we have that? I've never heard of this.

lol
Let me just whip out my critical theory(tm) skills to make something utterly useless that no one needs or wants and from which change shouldn't be effected because it's not based on data but simply gut feeling

Holla Forums is infamous for having absolutely subhuman shit tier taste when it comes to music, listening to shit like Protomen and garbage entry level metal.
It's not just 8ch Holla Forums either, it's both Holla Forums, for as long as i can remember.
Probably because people in Holla Forums have never been very flexible or creative mentally so the natural result is that they can't into music.

Here, for example.
The other board always made fun of Holla Forums when it comes to music, I've seen "fedoracore" and "Holla Forumscore" used often over the years to refer to the type of music Holla Forums like on average.

There's nothing wrong with the Protomen.

I made a review about Drakan the Order of the Flame, just because I love that game so much. Some people liked it, some didn't, so Idk if it's shit or not. Almost done with a Rez review as well.

Are you a not American?

Of course not. I thought my accent was a dead giveaway.

Wouldn't a fedora listen to the most obscure shit possible?

Fedoras are pretentious, they want to look intelligent and well versed in whatever but really aren't.

Do you play Planetside 2 with us by any chance?

I listen to only the best -classical, rock, evergreen, etc..
Movie/Game scores written by great composers, music that oozes atmosphere and feeling.

Only the very best is good enough

Nah, I don't play multiplayer games, and Planetside 2 I haven't even touched. Closest I got to that is exploring worlds.com and chilling out with the regulars there.

Ah, OK. You kinda sounded familiar, so I assumed.

I never saw people on this Holla Forums or 4cuck Holla Forums act pretentious over liking shit like Protomen. If anything, people consider /mu/ to be that.

I made this video on E.Y.E. a few months back. I plan to try and make more reviews on whatever here soon.

You kind of ramble a bit at times, but you seem aware of it. You also have a pretty voice

bump, seems like a bretty gud thread

Thanks user.

Mc fucking killyouself you fucking blue and purple.

Everyone should experience things themselves without anything interfering. Critics serve no purpose.

There's only so much time to spend on things, and I'd rather spend a couple minutes reading a well-thought-out review of a game than the time it takes to:
Assuming 8 hours a day are spent sleeping, and you work a 9 to 5, there's only 8 hours a day of free time, and that's before factoring in things like eating, commuting, and other basic living shit.
It's less accurate, sure, but the efficiency should be worth it. The fact that it's not is half the underlying reason for GG's existence

I'd like to review AvP2 and Colonial Marines because I'm interested in the Alien series and I've replayed those 2 countless times over and over again so I have an intimate experience with these 2.

My problem is that I don't know how to git gud at vocabulary, writing style, level design and gameplay.
Does anyone else want to get in on this and help me review it bit by bit? I'm better off commenting each section of a level rather than putting it into perspective and organizing my substance into a whole review.

...

...

...

Nice

Its better to read your own rules. Vocab is easy, read a few books in your free time and youll build them up without noticing. Writing is kind of your own thing as far as ive seen it.

Level design is learned by seeing good design along with bad design. Resi 4 has great design (despite more casual gameplay) based on having the player progress on their own, showing exactly where you should go (the house with the shotgun, a room at the end of the hallway, etc) and is tuned to the gameplay (more enemies are thrown at you to account for easier shooting and enemies dropping ammo, tight hallways are fit for harder situations). Exploration is rewarded and even taught to the player by forcing it near the beginning and saying how shooting the blue things gives you cool shit. Good level design is based on what the game chooses to shows you, and what it doesnt. Other games with great level design are Super Metroid, Klonoa, and Dustforce. If youve played these games and still dont get it, replay to get more acquainted. To see bad design, play a shitload of Doom wads with an analytical mindset, the occasional well-made level will significantly stand out

Gameplay plays intimately with the level design, so the above advice goes for gameplay as well. Gameplay is the base on which level design is built on. Assassin's Creed has a large focus on climbing on buildings at a high speed, so it gives you boxes and shit to run up to get high in a short time. At the same time, the combat and stealth are lackluster because the devs didnt want that to be the focus. Most games that use that type of combat do the same (arkham asylum is more about puzzles and stealth, for example).

In my 2 mini reviews in that post I provided examples when I said something definite about the game, you should do the same

Who the fuck cares about what a bunch of neckbeards listening to a nigger yelling nonsense thinks of us? lmao making a cult of personality surrounding a person/s rather than their music doesn't make you better than anyone. And before you jump the gun and call me a fedora too, i hate the protomen.

The main thing holding me back from reviews is my horrible memory problem. I'm lucky if I'm able to remember 90% of what happens in a game/show/movie after two days. Even luckier if I can remember more than the most basic of outlines after a week.
I could probably be a decent reviewer, by youtube standards, if I had the ability to remember things.

...

Now I wonder what the original was…