«

[GraveDigger]

Hi

I want to know that how big a review should be?

For instance, is this CD-Man 2 review acceptible?

Another Pacman style of game but with much better layout and design. The theme of the game is almost the same, you have to gobble all the dots while avoiding the attacks from the baddies. Snuffing the energy-charger will reverse the role for a limited time and give you a chance to take revenge on the baddies. Clear the screen from the dots to proceed to another level. The graphics are superb, done in VGA colors and great design.

If yes, then I have over 300 reviews ready for you. :Brain:

[Omuletzu]

Everybody has his own way of reviewing games.If you think that by that paragraph you exhausted the game, then the job is finished k:

[GraveDigger]

Well, in that case, go ahead and post that review on the site as all these reviews I have were solely written by yours truly a long time back for my very own website known as "DOS Graveyard," which I closed down due to IDSA.

[Omuletzu]

Originally posted by GraveDigger@Jan 18 2005, 01:55 PM
Well, in that case, go ahead and post that review on the site as all these reviews I have were solely written by yours truly a long time back for my very own website known as "DOS Graveyard," which I closed down due to IDSA.

You'r talking to the wrong person, i am not an admin.You should contact Kosta to give you ftp access

[marko river]

Well, yes, you should contact Kosta or Tom Henrik.

Now, I have idea. Well, personally I don't like very long reviews, but I hate even more short review that don;t tell you anything about game really, or just tell you a little so you can see taht reviewer didn't even bothered with playing. Then again, you don't need to write bigger review since game is just a clone.

So my idea is this: when reviewing the clone, so you doon't need to say all over again, just say what are new stuff, and WHOMEVER is supposed to put the game on the site can add link to original game.

In this example one can type: "If you never played Pacman, review about that game can be fouund HERE" and HERE is a link to Pacman review on our site.

I saw something like this on HOTU, very good idea. So, it's up to you adimns...

[GraveDigger]

Oh yeah Marko_river, thats a great idea..

They can add a link to another review of the same game like we have a lot of reviews at MobyGames.

My reviews are short and to the point and give a quick picture of the game.

Editing the Post:

A link to add another review for the same game will also be nice. This is for the sake of having a second opinion or you may say a critic's opinion. :bleh:

If you're worried about the length of reviews, read some of Kosta's. His reviews are some of the shortest on the site.

[The Niles]

The review length is unimportant but the amount of information that is given is. I would not allow the review you gave on the site. It has too little information about the game. Try to explain to people what is going on. Comparing a game to another (well known) game is a fine way of writing a review but the go into detail why you are comparing them (what is that makes them similar and why is one better then the other).

[Eagle of Fire]

Incidently, his reviews must be the first few reviews added to the site ever, so I guess we could excuse him for the fact he probably reviewed a lot of games at the same time, and that he might just not possess all the experience he have right now at the time.

[GraveDigger]

Actually, the fact is that we are dealing with old-skool games - games we've already played when they first came around. :whistle:

As far as I know only two kind of groups download these games. The first is the Players group, who already played these games in their hay days and just want to rejoice the fun. The other one is the collectors group that download each and every game just to increase their collection count. :angel:

Now, the first group already knows what the game is and the second group doesn't bother to know about it.