Register
The 2011 review contest has concluded with 200 reviews. That's freakin' amazing, good job to everyone who participated.
The grand prize winner was drawn live over IRC and is... Charbile! Congratulations.
For everyone else, this is the voting thread. Simply list the top three reviewers in your opinion (1st being 3 points, 2nd being 2 points, 3rd being 1 point). Self voting is allowed. Votes will be tallied up on April 9th. The remaining entrants will be drawn in a raffle and announced after that as well. You can view the main contest thread for a list of each reviewer's work.
Eligible Reviewers:
-JSH357
-Spoonweaver
-Gizmog1
-Mewmew
-Shizuma
-RMSephy
Winners should state their desired game for review by May 1st. The top two reviewers in votes will be given a video review of a game of their choice (I have generously increased the number of vote winners on a whim). Video reviews will be posted in the Slime Salad game discussion forum, as well as PMed to their respective winners some time in 2012.
And since this is as a good a time as any, I'm also opening the topic up to discussion of the contest itself. Topics of interest include:
1) What to do about newbie games. Do we really need 5 reviews of a 5 second game telling the author they did bad?
2) The idea of a review contest being itself terrible and should not be repeated next year.
3) Video reviews being terrible prizes and you'd want something else next year. Suggestions?
4) 3 ways to win is stupid and overly complicated.
And anything else on your mind. Good luck, contestants!
2011 Review Contest Voting [Polls Closed]
Mon Mar 26, 2012 9:01 am 
Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:59 am
1. Gizmog1 - I was gonna vote for myself, but let's be honest. Giz deserves this. Even though he didn't come close to finishing, he still wrote more than everyone else and was the most entertaining.
2. Myself - I think I did all right, maybe lost some steam on a few of the games but there were so many newbie games!
3. Charbile - His reviews were often painful to read (because he was dishing out the pain!)
4. Shizuma - The little he wrote was great
5. Spoonweaver - Spoon's reviews... lacked substance for the most part. He did at least review all the games, to his credit.
6. RMSephy & MewMew - Their reviews weren't bad, they just didn't write enough to get on radar.
The game from my library that I want you to review is QUERY 2.
1) What to do about newbie games. Do we really need 5 reviews of a 5 second game telling the author they did bad?
Nope. I think that reviewers should list the amount of play time it took to finish each title before reviews maybe.
2) The idea of a review contest being itself terrible and should not be repeated next year.
I thought the contest was great, a shame more people didn't enter.
3) Video reviews being terrible prizes and you'd want something else next year. Suggestions?
I'm OK with video reviews if you're gonna actually make them. *Glare*
4) 3 ways to win is stupid and overly complicated.
Nah
My website, the home of Motrya:
http://www.jshgaming.com
2. Myself - I think I did all right, maybe lost some steam on a few of the games but there were so many newbie games!
3. Charbile - His reviews were often painful to read (because he was dishing out the pain!)
4. Shizuma - The little he wrote was great
5. Spoonweaver - Spoon's reviews... lacked substance for the most part. He did at least review all the games, to his credit.
6. RMSephy & MewMew - Their reviews weren't bad, they just didn't write enough to get on radar.
The game from my library that I want you to review is QUERY 2.
1) What to do about newbie games. Do we really need 5 reviews of a 5 second game telling the author they did bad?
Nope. I think that reviewers should list the amount of play time it took to finish each title before reviews maybe.
2) The idea of a review contest being itself terrible and should not be repeated next year.
I thought the contest was great, a shame more people didn't enter.
3) Video reviews being terrible prizes and you'd want something else next year. Suggestions?
I'm OK with video reviews if you're gonna actually make them. *Glare*
4) 3 ways to win is stupid and overly complicated.
Nah
My website, the home of Motrya:
http://www.jshgaming.com
Mon Mar 26, 2012 1:54 pm
Voting on quantity then quality.
1. JSH
2. SPO
3. GIZ
1) What to do about newbie games. Do we really need 5 reviews of a 5 second game telling the author they did bad?
Hm. Well, without the bad games, the other games wouldn't stand out as much as they did. It's really an Iron Reviewer gauntlet, so I'm not sure what to do here either.
2) The idea of a review contest being itself terrible and should not be repeated next year.
I would argue it is better than game-making contests. Easier, opens discussion on games, makes it seem like people actually play them. Has more potential to grow a player-base.
3) Video reviews being terrible prizes and you'd want something else next year. Suggestions?
It's not that they're terrible, just different. Maybe a review of the reviewer? I found the contest fun in the way I imagine people who enter that 'write a novel in a month' or 'draw 100 sketches challenge' do. See if you can do it, get a better understanding of it as you go.
4) 3 ways to win is stupid and overly complicated.
Maybe judge based on separate categories of what a good review can be. Helpful, encouraging, funny, critical, brutally honest, etc.
1. JSH
2. SPO
3. GIZ
1) What to do about newbie games. Do we really need 5 reviews of a 5 second game telling the author they did bad?
Hm. Well, without the bad games, the other games wouldn't stand out as much as they did. It's really an Iron Reviewer gauntlet, so I'm not sure what to do here either.
2) The idea of a review contest being itself terrible and should not be repeated next year.
I would argue it is better than game-making contests. Easier, opens discussion on games, makes it seem like people actually play them. Has more potential to grow a player-base.
3) Video reviews being terrible prizes and you'd want something else next year. Suggestions?
It's not that they're terrible, just different. Maybe a review of the reviewer? I found the contest fun in the way I imagine people who enter that 'write a novel in a month' or 'draw 100 sketches challenge' do. See if you can do it, get a better understanding of it as you go.
4) 3 ways to win is stupid and overly complicated.
Maybe judge based on separate categories of what a good review can be. Helpful, encouraging, funny, critical, brutally honest, etc.
Mon Mar 26, 2012 2:14 pm
I enjoyed the big review thread, and it made me just slightly giddy every time somebody reviewed Escape the Wolf OHR :)
Tue Mar 27, 2012 3:46 am
Accidentally erased my answers, so here's the short version:
1) Do what we did with Harry Potter. If people complain and the contest runner feels charitable, compromise. Write a paragraph about each part, agree with Charbile and mention something you liked, lots of shit you could do.
2) It was a great contest and what better way to supplement Game of the Year voting than by talking about all the games from the year and encouraging people to play and judge all of them?
3) Video reviews are a cool prize for game designers, but people who haven't made games might feel left out. Not sure if that'd ever be an issue. No better suggestions.
4) I thought there were only two ways to win. Didn't think it was stupid or complicated either way.
And votes. These were hard to make. Mewmew and Shiz did a really good job with the games they covered and if they'd done even a few more it would've been great. RMSephy also did a great job, but one review definitely isn't going to cut it, even though JSH trolled him into it which is funny as hell.
The big three all had their own ups and downs. JSH had the best style, but I know used a lot of debug keys and didn't even replay some of the games which is kind of harsh.
Charbile didn't bother with prose and just laid all the cards on the table, but had a lot of good points and valid criticisms. Hopefully people will keep a thick skin and learn something.
Spoonweaver was kind of inconsistent. He had some really good ones (like Armored Devil) and some really bad ones (First Fantasy). He also reused some of his contest votes which wasn't against the rules but rubbed me the wrong way. I did like that he used paragraphs rather than the red ink/see me after class format Charbile chose, but mostly I felt he lacked insight.
1. JSH
2. SHZ
3. CHR
1) Do what we did with Harry Potter. If people complain and the contest runner feels charitable, compromise. Write a paragraph about each part, agree with Charbile and mention something you liked, lots of shit you could do.
2) It was a great contest and what better way to supplement Game of the Year voting than by talking about all the games from the year and encouraging people to play and judge all of them?
3) Video reviews are a cool prize for game designers, but people who haven't made games might feel left out. Not sure if that'd ever be an issue. No better suggestions.
4) I thought there were only two ways to win. Didn't think it was stupid or complicated either way.
And votes. These were hard to make. Mewmew and Shiz did a really good job with the games they covered and if they'd done even a few more it would've been great. RMSephy also did a great job, but one review definitely isn't going to cut it, even though JSH trolled him into it which is funny as hell.
The big three all had their own ups and downs. JSH had the best style, but I know used a lot of debug keys and didn't even replay some of the games which is kind of harsh.
Charbile didn't bother with prose and just laid all the cards on the table, but had a lot of good points and valid criticisms. Hopefully people will keep a thick skin and learn something.
Spoonweaver was kind of inconsistent. He had some really good ones (like Armored Devil) and some really bad ones (First Fantasy). He also reused some of his contest votes which wasn't against the rules but rubbed me the wrong way. I did like that he used paragraphs rather than the red ink/see me after class format Charbile chose, but mostly I felt he lacked insight.
1. JSH
2. SHZ
3. CHR
Sun Apr 08, 2012 4:47 am
Just a reminder that voting ends soon and only 3 people have voted.
Sun Apr 08, 2012 2:54 pm
A) Giz
B) charb
C) JSH
B) charb
C) JSH
Mon Apr 09, 2012 12:09 pm
Oh damn. This was an amazing contest, I would hate to not vote. I'll try to remember to do so later today if it's still open. I read through a hundred odd reviews, but can't remember off the top of my head who bested whom.
Tue Apr 10, 2012 2:00 pm
Voting:
1. Gizmog
Giz's reviews were very entertaining, often went the extra mile, and had all the other elements of good reviews. He should review OHR games for a living.
2. JSH
Writing comments for each place in my ranking was a bad idea, because I don't know what to say about JSH's reviews that hasn't been said.
(2.1 Charbile)
I never get to read this much Charbile! Train-of-thought reviews which frequently went off topic, for which I'm docking a ranking, but thought they were a good complement to the other reviews written.
3. Spoonweaver
Spoonweaver's reviews were often poor, mixed with good ones; it was clear that his goal was to hit 54 reviews, whatever the wreckage. Appreciated nonetheless.
Discussion:
Oh right, this is the discussion thread too.
This was a wonderful contest which produced a valuable and entertaining resource, and if people are willing to write an avalanche of reviews every year, then without a doubt it should be held every year.
It's odd that the grand prize winner is out of the running for the audience selected prize. Perhaps you weren't counting on anyone reviewing all the games. Could offer two orthogonal prizes instead. I don't think the best prize should be drawn by raffle.
I was thinking of writing some reviews myself. I've been thinking of making my entrance to the review writing business for most of a decade actually. But so many reviews got written by other people that I didn't feel bad for not joining in.
Also, of course, this contest was also really good for the Game of The Year voting. I feel really bad for not voting in that one, but I played way too few of the games, and frankly I don't think my opinion on the matter holds much weight compared to people who actually played and reviewed every frigging game. So that's my excuse: I'm blaming it on Hawk.
I am thankful that Forest Temple wasn't counted as a review eligible game.
Likely to add more later...
1. Gizmog
Giz's reviews were very entertaining, often went the extra mile, and had all the other elements of good reviews. He should review OHR games for a living.
2. JSH
Writing comments for each place in my ranking was a bad idea, because I don't know what to say about JSH's reviews that hasn't been said.
(2.1 Charbile)
I never get to read this much Charbile! Train-of-thought reviews which frequently went off topic, for which I'm docking a ranking, but thought they were a good complement to the other reviews written.
3. Spoonweaver
Spoonweaver's reviews were often poor, mixed with good ones; it was clear that his goal was to hit 54 reviews, whatever the wreckage. Appreciated nonetheless.
Discussion:
Oh right, this is the discussion thread too.
This was a wonderful contest which produced a valuable and entertaining resource, and if people are willing to write an avalanche of reviews every year, then without a doubt it should be held every year.
It's odd that the grand prize winner is out of the running for the audience selected prize. Perhaps you weren't counting on anyone reviewing all the games. Could offer two orthogonal prizes instead. I don't think the best prize should be drawn by raffle.
I was thinking of writing some reviews myself. I've been thinking of making my entrance to the review writing business for most of a decade actually. But so many reviews got written by other people that I didn't feel bad for not joining in.
Also, of course, this contest was also really good for the Game of The Year voting. I feel really bad for not voting in that one, but I played way too few of the games, and frankly I don't think my opinion on the matter holds much weight compared to people who actually played and reviewed every frigging game. So that's my excuse: I'm blaming it on Hawk.
I am thankful that Forest Temple wasn't counted as a review eligible game.
Likely to add more later...
Tue Apr 10, 2012 3:32 pm
And that's a wrap on voting. Results will be posted shortly.