View Single Post

Default 

June 24th, 2011, 14:15
Originally Posted by skavenhorde View Post
Thanks. I thought the review was perfect. It detailed everything I would want to know about if I hadn't already bought the game
Cheers. I didn't clock my writing but do note that by "a few hours" I mean for the first draft. The editing post-first draft is almost as hellish and dragged out as the writing process, and in this case I had multiple people read it or bits of it and comment.

Originally Posted by skavenhorde View Post
Maybe that's a little too much.

Ehhh you don't want to hear about that though.
I don't mind, though other readers here might not be too interested in the ins and outs of the writing process.

As for notes: I'm a relatively brief note-taker. For The River of Time I had literally only six short notes but it turned into a four-page review, and it's just stuff like "easier to get engaged in this story, its scale is smaller" and "dig the puzzles". For me, notes are only a tool while I write a lot off the cuff. If I want to go more indepth I need more notes though, for the Witcher 2 I ended up with a full page of sentence fragments and notes from conversations. But it's just what you're used to and your style. I don't think you can take too many notes, though for most reviews (and this is what I usually fail at), you kind of have to consider what your audience is interested in hearing, and not dig too deep into details. It's easy to lose the narrative flow of your review or a good solid overview of it to too many details.

Originally Posted by skavenhorde View Post
It never occurred to me that it might be a good idea to play through a game twice, but I can see how that would give you different perspectives each time and a major advantage when writing about it.
Depends on the game. My rule of thumb for RPGs is this: if there's no character creation and little flexibility in character build and game path, one playthrough will do (like Rise of the Argonauts), for most RPGs, one playthrough and a few hours into a second playthrough will do (The River of Time, Avadon). I never review a game without having finished it.

The exception to the rule are RPGs like Alpha Protocol, The Witcher 2 and Fallout: New Vegas, heavy on the C&C and open in paths. I don't think you can fairly review Alpha Protocol or the Witcher 2 without having played it twice or at least far into a second playthrough. I think I put 50 hours into TW2 (didn't log as accurately as I normally do, but I'm guesstimating 30 hours into the first playthrough and 20 into the second, might be more), and Steam tells me I put 39 hours in Alpha Protocol and 82 hours in New Vegas.

It's the advantage of working for GameBanshee. The pay's not great, but it's freelance anyway, and I get all the time to prep and detail a review as much as I like. Most professional reviewers aren't that fortunate sadly.
Brother None is offline

Brother None

Brother None's Avatar
SasqWatch

#7

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,554