You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Scenario Design and Discussion
Moderated by HockeySam18

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.943 replies, Closed
Age of Kings Heaven » Forums » Scenario Design and Discussion » Review Requests: about Reviewing and Tutorials III
Bottom
Topic Subject:Review Requests: about Reviewing and Tutorials III
« Previous Page  1 2 3 ··· 10 ··· 20 ··· 27  Next Page »
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 07-22-10 09:35 AM CT (US)         


Here you may request a review for your file or for another's, whether it be because you would like a second opinion or because you believe a certain file is rated unfairly or is even over-rated. To do so simply leave a comment and the Thread Reviewers here will take a look at it. Please be patient as a skilled review can take some time to write.

BECOMING A THREAD REVIEWER


If you would like to help out with the community and become a Thread Reviewer, you need just four approved reviews. Please post your request in this thread or send a mail to panel@heavengames.com, naming your last review. You do not have to review regularly, but keep in mind that if you have not posted or updated a review within three months you will be put on inactive. To become active again, simply find your name below and post a review. If your name is not listed inactive anymore, your last review will have dated before 01/01/09 (DD/MM/YY) and you may re-enter the thread after one posted review only.




ACTIVE THREAD REVIEWERS
(In order of number of reviews)
* = Official Reviewer

169 Possidon*: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS, AI-Files
107 Lord Basse*: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS
92 Mashek*: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities
80 Sword_of_Storm (Jatayu)*: Single Player, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS, AI-Files
45 Panel*: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities
35 alekshs: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities, Recorded Games, RMS, AI-Files
30 dragonslayermcmx: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities
27 Sarn: Single Player, Mod Packs
18 Mayank Sharma: Single Player, Multiplayer, Mod Packs, Utilities
9 RladalFatih: Single Player, Non-Playable Scenarios
6 Dead_End: Cinematic Scenarios, Non-Playable Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities
4 HockeySam18: Single Player

CURRENT INACTIVE THREAD REVIEWERS
(In order of time of inactivity)

11 Leif Ericson: Single Player, RMS, AI-Files
55 Popeychops*: Single Player, Multiplayer, Cinematic Scenarios, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS, AI-Files
26 Julius999*: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios
25 Dtrungle*: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios, Utilities
09 joshua4missions: Single Player, Mod Packs
10 Fanica: Single Player, Mod Packs, Utilities
05 Jecon: Single Player, Utilities
08 hailstorm65: Single Player, Mod Packs, Utilities
27 Cilibinarii: Single Player, Cinematic Scenarios, Utilities
23 FuzzyFurry25: Single Player, Mod Packs, Utilities
16 Guthan: Single Player, Multiplayer, Mod Packs, Utilities, RMS

OFFICIAL REVIEWERS


Mashek
Lord Basse
Popeychops
Julius999
Jatayu (aka Sword_of_Storm)
Possidon
Dtrungle
Stephen Richards
Panel

HALL OF FAME


231 Tanneur99
95 Lord_Fadawah
92 BrandNewCar
61 clayperboy
54 rwilde
31 Stephen Richards*
30 zyxomma100
25 Magnum Zero
24 RF_Gandalf




REVIEW LIST

The list below consists of a number of requests and/or downloads recently rated by thread reviewers. Requests are marked R and updates U. Thread Reviewers are free to review whichever file they want, but should be aware that the designers at the top of each list are waiting the longest for a review. Files that have received a review in the time of request in this thread (whether by a thread reviewer or not) will be removed from the list unless a second opinion is requested.

AI Files: None

Utilities:
R Notepad++ AI Editor, by beladar; No Reviewer
R Enchanced Editor, by GeneralR; Reviewer: panel 3.3
DirectDrawFix - Color Update, by scripter64; Reviewer: panel 5.0
All Bitmaps of all Units, by dragonslayermcmx; Reviewer: Lord Basse 5.0
All Bitmaps of all Buildings, by dragonslayermcmx; Reviewer: Lord Basse 5.0
Advanced Genie Editor 2, by Keisari Tapsa; Reviewer: Lord Basse 5.0
SLP Editor 2.2.5, by Hawk_Ruralist; Reviewer: Lord Basse 5.0
DirectDrawFix - Color Update, by scripter64; Reviewer: Possidon 5.0


Mod Packs:
U Age of Vampires, by Khan Ivayl; Reviewer: Mashek 4.0, alekshs 5.0
Explosive Turtle Ship, by dragonslayermcmx; Reviewer: panel 4.0
AH-64 Apache Armed Helicopter, by Hawk_Adongct; Reviewer: Lord Basse 4.3
Archery Range Pack, by Rageofempires; Reviewer: Mayank Sharma 2.8
Transformers BUMBLEBEE, by Hawk_Adongct; Reviewer: dragonslayermcmx 3.3
Oriental shield king, by Hawk_Adongct; Reviewer: dragonslayermcmx 4.3

Cinematic Scenarios:
ACSC10 - The Last Samurai - Blood Memories, by Sebastien; Reviewer: Mashek 4.6, Lord Basse 4.4
A Tribute To RU42, by Hawk_Adongct; Reviewer: panel 4.6

Single Player:
R A Mans Home is His Castle, by joshua4missions; No Reviewer
R Sir Spart on Trench Shores, Demo, by Algren t l s; No reviewer
R Brotherhood of War (updated 1.3 version), by kahn1969; Reviewer: Panel;
R The Arabian Nights, by Jackrum; no reviewer
R ICE AGE ICE MAZE, by Xylon Draganthus; Reviewer: Panel 3.2
The Jaguar Gold, by Lord Basse; Reviewer: Sarn 4.8, dragonslayermcmx 4.8, Possidon 4.6
R Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey, by Celebi Megatron; Reviewer: panel 4.4
The Conquest of Kent by Andrew W; Reviewer: Sarn 3.8
Phoenix (Unfinished), by Teotl; Reviewer: panel 4.2
Demon Town, by Devastator; Reviewer: panel 3.8
the TWO KINGS by Genghis, by Pro_Designer; Reviewer: Alekshs 3.0
Britannia Colonia, by Yekkelle; Reviewer: Sarn 3.0
Treasure Predator, by Devastator; Reviewer: Sword_Of_Storm 3.8
Helm's Deep by Magnus, by Lord Magnus; Reviewer: Sarn 2.4
MGC12-An evil "surprise", by Alekshs; Reviewer: Sarn 4.0
MGC2012 - The Siege of the Fort, by Mephiles5; Reviewer: Sarn 2.8

Non-Playable Scenarios:
R Forest, by Dragonslayermcmx; panel 4.0
The Jungle Thinghy, by IsuckatXbows; panel 1.5
R District of Allin, by Algren t l s; panel 3.0

Random Maps:
R Fertile Crescent, Revision 1, by OtmShankIiI; no reviewer

Multiplayer:
R Compilation of Multiplayer Games, by jburnell; No Reviewer
R Persia - Non Random Map, by Lakayaa; No Reviewer
R UDP - Deathly Cliffs - V3.2, by Heroes; No Reviewer
R Battleships, by TheReal_Hunter; No Reviewer
R The Seas of Egressa RP, by Guthan; No Reviewer
R city catastrophe(complete version), by bigboy37731; No Reviewer
R UDP Prison Break, by Alevo; No Reviewer
R Paradise Lands, by sathcooperation; No Reviewer
R SAVE YOUR @$$ (beta2), by rohit021089; No Reviewer

Recorded Games:
DM 1 vs 4 Hardest.mgx, by zebratangozebra; Reviewer: Alekshs 1.5





FILE UPDATES AND OBSELETE REVIEWS

Please edit your review after an update. A designer can ask for the removal of all reviews after an update if he feels that they do not represent the actual version of his submission. Reviews that address issues that are fixed, altered or ameliorated do not serve the visitors of our site. A review has to be a valuable tool for the designer and the downloader.

RECENT UPDATES/ REVIEWS TO EDIT
(In order of date of the update)

10/23/11 Roots to Noah's Arc, by Pancho Villa 347; Reviewer: Mashek
11/25/11 Age of Vampires - Blood Reign in Transsylvania, by Khan Ivayl; Reviewers: Mashek




Please read the REVIEW GUIDELINES

Without trying to enforce the Review Guidelines as something as law, they are still a very important part of the review system here at Age of Kings Heaven, and are used to create consistency between reviewers at the Blacksmith in order to establish fairness and equality for reviews. With the Review Guidelines’ recent update all reviewers need to take into account the new addition of rules when reviewing. However, Angel SpineMan’s primary objective for reviewing in the Old Guidelines still applies today:

“This article will provide a description of how to write quality reviews for Age of Kings Heaven that are scored consistently between reviewers and are helpful to both the file's creator as well as the potential downloader.”

In some cases, a small percentage of reviewers tend to review files according to their own rules, leading to inconsistency between reviews at the Blacksmith, which is neither helpful nor fair to anyone. To have reviews at the Blacksmith that are fair and helpful, reviewers have to follow some rules to score consistently.

If you have any questions about reviewing, please do not hesitate to post in this thread!




Single Player Campaigns and Scenarios


There are many invaluable lessons to learn when becoming a good reviewer, and a few other things besides that will result in a good and fair review. Some things are self-evident when reviewing a file; in general, do not review game styles you do not enjoy and review files according to the date of its release. There are many files back in 2000-2002 that received a score of a high 4, which would not fit the standards of today. You have to take into account the standards of the day, and rate accordingly. In addition, if the scenario is designed for original Age of Kings, review it playing AoK.

Below you will find a general breakdown of each category from a review for your convenience.

PLAYABILITY is about the fun you had while playing a scenario, and here you need to mention what affected your enjoyment in a positive and/or negative way.

BALANCE is about how easy or difficult a scenario was for you. You should mention which difficulty you played on when reviewing, although this is not mandatory. A good approach to reviewing a file would be to start with moderate and later change to standard, to see if the scenario was too easy or too hard or well-balanced overall; before ending off with hard difficulty. However, reviewers will need to take into account that not all files are difficulty-level-dynamic. In general, remember that you are rating the file according to your own skill level and not that of others.

CREATIVITY covers every aspect of a scenario. Remember that a file does not need anything new to achieve a high score.

MAP DESIGN scores compared to a random map which rates 2.0. Anything worse or better than a random map may be rated up or down accordingly. Some tips for rating this category is that you rate what you see during game play, which means no Marco and Polo. The map size and how much of the map was used should not affect the rating.

STORY/INSTRUCTIONS is a little more interesting than some. Probably the most common detail reviewers tend to overlook is that this category covers two aspects of any scenario, story and instructions. Not just one or the other. If the file is lacking in one then you can make note of that in the review and mark down accordingly. However, this does not pertain to multiplayer scenarios, whereby a story is not mandatory. In general, the presence of a functional story (while not necessarily being a good story) with instructions should be midpoint, a 3. From there you should be able to give an accurate overall rating for this category.

Non-Playable Scenarios

For files such as those where playability is void and map design is the only feature of the file (e.g. entries to the Totally-Terrain Contest), the category should therefore be used to take a look at the technical and creative qualities of the map design, while referring to how that design pushes the boundaries of realism in an AOK environment. One particular thing to note here is that just because the file is all about pretty map design, that doesn’t mean it cannot feature any creative features that might breathe life into the design, such as towns brought to life by wandering villagers, people going about their everyday lives, and other unique devices besides. Basically, anything that goes into making the map more alive and as such realistic should be taken into consideration. As the file will likely feature little anything else other than map design, a single overall rating between 1 and 5 will be fine.

Scenarios without Fighting

An exception to the balance category is when the author of a particular file did not intend any fighting, or very little of, to feature in the scenario. From the review guidelines:

One important note about scoring the balance category for scenarios is that where no fighting takes place, such as some puzzle scenarios and some RPG-style scenarios, is that just because the player cannot die in such scenarios, that doesn't mean the scenario isn't balanced. Difficulty can also be present via puzzles or other devices, and the balance of these should be taken into account.

For files such as the Pretty Town Contest entries whereby there is a great degree of walking and nothing else much, reviewers should therefore take into account the author’s intention. If it was intended that you walk around and gaze at the beauty and wonder of a landscape, then you need to rate on that account.

Rating Cut-scene Style Scenarios

Cut-scenes rate like any other scenario, the only difference is that most cut-scenes do not allow any interaction for the player, requiring only that the player sits down and watch as the story unfolds. Cut-scenes are a mixed bag of lollies; some designers appreciate them, others however do not. The purpose of a cut-scene is to tell a story, to continue or conclude a project, like in Ulio with the old man in the forest and the two travellers. In the general sense of the word Playability, we rate the fun we had while watching the cut-scene and how playable it is.

The very definition of Playability denotes many errors, some already obvious. In Tanneur99’s words, the previous Blacksmith administrator and owner of this thread, “playability is a bastard word. It does not exist in the English language and separating the word into play and ability gives an incorrect meaning for the category. Ability to play would be listed under balance, the ability of a player to play a certain difficulty level of a file. It is a common error to believe that cut-scenes are unplayable. Gordon Farrell wrote that you play a cut-scene in the same sense as you play a CD on your CD player. If the CD has scratches and/or is dirty it is less playable to unplayable. A cut-scene is less playable to unplayable when we encounter bugs and/or lag. In closing, rate the fun you had watching the cut-scene and deduct for bugs and lag.”

For rating Balance in cut-scenes, the review guideline gives us this description:

for scenarios with no interactivity, such as cut-scenes, this category should be used to examine the flow and technical merits of the cut-scene: did it run smoothly? Was everything technically put together well

This means that reviewers can now rate down in this category for all those dodgy timing sequences, overlapping music, and anything else that would not necessarily affect one’s enjoyment but the technical aspect of a cut-scene. This also gives balance in cinematic scenarios more depth and meaning, and contributes more to the overall rating of a review than previously attained. Every technical aspect is to be taken into account, and what happens on-screen should generally correspond smoothly with dialogue and the overall transition of the story. Generally speaking, the less the cinematic leaves up to the viewer’s imagination, the higher the quality of the presentation. In saying all that, a cinematic should never feel rushed or sluggish, but proceed from scene to scene as the atmosphere and story suggests.

Demos, Teasers, Unfinished Scenarios

Unfinished files, demos and teasers are common at the Blacksmith and make up a great percentage of submissions. Many designers, like writers, look for feedback on their work: to help get past a certain point in their project where they might be hindered from progressing, or to catch up on any bugs that might be bothering them. Some authors return to the file and provide the Blacksmith with a complete update of the file as a result of the feedback.

When reviewing unfinished files, it’s important not to discriminate because it is an incomplete work. There’s no reason to knock down points just because somebody put Demo or Teaser in the title to get some feedback to know what he/she could improve on in an update. Rate a demo as if it is a finished product. This will achieve the best possible feedback for the author of an unfinished file.

Multiplayer

The Official Review Guidelines is the directive for rating single player scenarios and multiplayer scenarios, with an exception to Balance only. When judging BALANCE in multiplayer scenarios, you rate nothing else but the starting positions of each player, which should be equal for all to achieve the highest rating. For more on this please read post 264 of the previous thread.

Random Map Script


AI-Files

The first question to ask when rating an AI-File is what is the AI intended to do and how well does it perform in that specific area? There are AI-Files developed for many intents and purposes: for scenario design, training, specific maps (e.g. Arabia), death match, tournament, defensive/ aggressive files, water maps or land maps only, etc.

If the AI-file is developed for Age of Kings test it playing Age of Kings only. Rating an AI according to your own experience might be biased unless the AI cheats. Cheating AI-files, as forbidden for tournaments, are meant to play against human players. A good way to test a non-cheating AI is against the standard AI. If its performance compares to the standard one, it is average and the minimum rating should be a 3. In general, rate the AI-file according to its time. Many AI-files were developed to beat another specific one. It would be unfair to knock off points of an AI developed in 2000 because it loses against a more recent one.

Modification Pack Script

A Modification Pack Script (MPS) is mainly an item for the player, which has a limited use for designers; the content will not always suit a designer’s endeavours in scenario design and is very limited to its audience. Keep this in mind when you rate mod pack scripts for USEFULNESS/NOVELTY and QUALITY/INSTRUCTIONS. The main categories are USEFULNESS and QUALITY for the overall rating of a MPS. Use NOVELTY and INSTRUCTIONS to correct the category rating. Still, for a perfect rating the MPS has to excel in all four categories.

Utilities

There is no official guideline for reviewing utilities, but for some ideas you can go here. A utility is a tool for the designer and has hardly any use for the player; keep this in mind when you rate utilities for USEFULNESS/NOVELTY and QUALITY/INSTRUCTIONS. Often you cannot rate the novelty factor because the file is another eye candy map of Lord of the Rings, a Volcano, Waterfall, Trigger Guide, Tutorial or collection of battle sounds. In other words, nothing new. Originally the fifth category was Creativity but this was too close to Novelty, better to have the two rated together if possible. When you feel Novelty does not apply, you can replace it with Creativity. The four categories are of equal importance for the overall rating of a utility.

Recorded Games

The value of a recorded game is highly subjective depending mainly on the purpose for which the submitter uploaded it. A recorded game must have a specific and defined purpose so the viewer can gain knowledge and/or entertainment value from the game. The submitter must specify exactly what to look for, what the point of the upload is.

It is up to the reviewer to check if there was any purpose and how well the recorded game met the intended goals. If it is supposed to be an example of a rushing tactic but no attacks happen until 30 minutes into the game, it is a bad example of the tactic. The rating is not about how well everybody played, if the teams were equally strong, you can mention that but it should not affect the rating.

The questions to answer: What is the purpose of the record? How well does the game show the intended goals? Is it entertaining and/or can the viewer gain knowledge from it?




Review Thread History

Luke Gevaerts started the Review Request Thread 03/30/2002. Tanneur took over 11/30/2002 until 7/11/2009. I (Mashek) have since taken over and updated the thread as best I can (disputable) to feature more relevant information according to today’s guidelines.

[This message has been edited by Dead_End (edited 05-18-2012 @ 07:04 PM).]

AuthorReplies:
John Mendl
Squire
posted 07-22-10 11:05 AM CT (US)     1 / 943       
Please add 'John Mendl 2. The Control of Bavaria' as well. I had made the request in the other topic which is archived.

[This message has been edited by John Mendl (edited 07-23-2010 @ 05:23 AM).]

Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 07-22-10 03:04 PM CT (US)     2 / 943       
Hurrah! A new thread!
Just a suggestion, but would it be worth you giving us reviewers a "to do" list of the newest and most worthy files?

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile
Possidon
Slayer
posted 07-22-10 03:20 PM CT (US)     3 / 943       
Thats quite a good idea Popey. I like it. But I don't suggest putting all the new files on it. Only the ones that sound good or perhaps have been announced on the forums or been posted in the CCs.
Francis de Talking France
Squire
(id: Watson)
posted 07-22-10 03:23 PM CT (US)     4 / 943       
Not a lot of people ask for reviews currently, so I think Mashek would be hard pressed to find a To Do list of scenarios. It'd be very small, and these lucky scenarios would obviously recieve a hell lot of reviews, not that it particularly matters. Ulio alone has 17 reviews, and I don't know anything else which has a higher score.
Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 07-22-10 03:33 PM CT (US)     5 / 943       
newest and most worthy
My idea was for it to be a priority mix of both, and when someone reviews each item its struck off the todo list. So we review other items, but make sure that these guys get one first.
Its so theres a newly reviewed load of fresh stuff, and not so fresh but awesome stuff.

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile
Francis de Talking France
Squire
(id: Watson)
posted 07-22-10 03:36 PM CT (US)     6 / 943       
when someone reviews each item its struck off the todo list.
Yea, I just thought of that after I submitted my post.
Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 07-22-10 03:45 PM CT (US)     7 / 943       
And this is to be in addition to the full list of awaiting items, so that these can be a challenge to get a review in 3-5 days of going up, max.

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 07-22-10 09:12 PM CT (US)     8 / 943       
@Popeychops

I like the idea, but it's just too much work on my behalf. What determines a good file? It would be fairer and easier for me if you simply scanned through the files compiled above that interest you and download them. Some have been there for years.

Another idea would be for each one of us to take at least two files from either the Single Player and Multiplayer lists and review them. We could wipe out all those awaiting a review in just a few days.

As always, the newest files awaiting a review are always found at the bottom of the list and the oldest at the top.

[This message has been edited by Mashek (edited 07-22-2010 @ 09:43 PM).]

TheLaughingMule
Lady Mule
posted 07-23-10 02:27 AM CT (US)     9 / 943       
Wow Mashek, this place looks great! I love what you have done with the landscaping and the colors suit the place well. I think it needs a Mona Lisa over the fire place, tho.

Edit: Not exactly a Leonardo, but here is a cheap one I found at a flea market...


Olaf the Tardy ~ ~ ~ ~ T he Laughing Mule
              (\__/)
              |^^|-,___,-._,<
              (o o),|___| \
           _V_v_||_||_||_||_v_v_V
.sig by Dark_Reign

[This message has been edited by TheLaughingMule (edited 07-23-2010 @ 02:44 AM).]

Fanica
Squire
posted 07-23-10 07:37 AM CT (US)     10 / 943       
I'd like another review on my Mongol Invasion.

The 1st Most Improved Forummer of 2010.
The 3rd Most Improved Designer of both 2009 and 2010.
Obviously, member of the great and the well known BlackForest Studios.
Was host of Continous Screenshot Competition I at AoEHeaven.
Possidon
Slayer
posted 07-23-10 09:59 AM CT (US)     11 / 943       
Holdiays now for me so I am going to try and start reviewing more. I'll try and go through the list of SP games.

EDIT:
Just finished my review for Gwyndlegard giving it straight 5s. It is one of my favourite scenarios ever. I also have done a short review for Isolation Years by Thunder77 giving it a 4.2.

EDIT 2:
I just updated my Sahara RMS completely remaking it from scratch. i was hoping somebody could give me a new review or if Leif Ericson could update his review.

[This message has been edited by Possidon (edited 07-23-2010 @ 03:07 PM).]

Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 07-23-10 08:34 PM CT (US)     12 / 943       
@Mule

It's no Booth but it'll do. No really, thanks!

[This message has been edited by Mashek (edited 07-23-2010 @ 08:50 PM).]

Jatayu
Squire
(id: Sword_of_STORM)
posted 07-24-10 00:29 AM CT (US)     13 / 943       
I have reviewed 'All along the watchtower' by Tlaloc. take me off inactive list please.

,
Jatayu O===|¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯/
`
Battle of Saraighat, 1671|Atlantis, the Lost Realm|AOE Roman Modpack|My profile
ि
StormWind Studios
John Mendl
Squire
posted 07-24-10 07:12 AM CT (US)     14 / 943       
Please add 'John Mendl 2. The Control of Bavaria' as well. I had made the request in the other topic which is archived.
Please do it. Im talking about adding it to the review requests btw.

[This message has been edited by John Mendl (edited 07-24-2010 @ 07:13 AM).]

Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 07-24-10 08:46 AM CT (US)     15 / 943       
Ah ok Mashek, I see what you mean. I've reviewed Gwyndlegard MP edition.

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile
Possidon
Slayer
posted 07-24-10 03:21 PM CT (US)     16 / 943       
I asked this yesterday but I don't know if you saw it.

"I just updated my Sahara RMS completely remaking it from scratch. i was hoping somebody could give me a new review or if Leif Ericson could update his review." - What i wrote yesteray
Mash
Huskarl
(id: Mashek)
posted 07-25-10 03:24 AM CT (US)     17 / 943       
@Jatayu

Glad to have you back into it mate; keep them coming.

[This message has been edited by Mashek (edited 07-25-2010 @ 03:27 AM).]

Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 07-25-10 09:52 AM CT (US)     18 / 943       
Possidon, we did notice it, but you regularly ask for reviews on items, and you've already had a review by Leif. As such, I think the general consensus was to give your request low priority.

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile
John Mendl
Squire
posted 07-25-10 09:59 AM CT (US)     19 / 943       
He has the right to ask for more reviews, even more considering how many reviews he wrote for others' works.

[This message has been edited by John Mendl (edited 07-25-2010 @ 09:59 AM).]

Possidon
Slayer
posted 07-25-10 10:22 AM CT (US)     20 / 943       
Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 07-25-10 10:28 AM CT (US)     21 / 943       
Yes john he has the right to ask for a review, but I was simply explaining why I, and the other reviewers, apparently, consider his a low priority.

Does he have the right to repeat his request the next day? I think that's rather unfair considering that his script is not a major piece of work, and has already been reviewed once.

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile
Dtrungle
Squire
posted 07-25-10 11:11 AM CT (US)     22 / 943       
Of course he has the right to repeat the request if it seems that noone saw it. The topic thread wasn't editted in btw.

Also, it's a lot better to review for active scenario designers rather than dead ones, no duh?

~
[My Dropped RPG Project | Keltos - RPG] [My Finished Games | MGC09 - Where Am I + MGC11 - All For The Horse + Puzzle Racing] [My Current Project | Defense of The Towers]
~~~
A RPG Scenario You Should Play | Tsubasa's Tale | Another RPG Scenario You Should Play | IceQuest
Dead_End
Cavalier
posted 07-25-10 11:19 AM CT (US)     23 / 943       
Of course he has the right to repeat the request if it seems that noone saw it. The topic thread wasn't editted in btw.
Not replying to it doesn't mean they didn't see it. I think you should give a post a little bit more time than just a mere day.
John Mendl
Squire
posted 07-25-10 11:31 AM CT (US)     24 / 943       
IMO, its still not bad considering how much effort he did in helping the community by his innumerous reviews.
Dtrungle
Squire
posted 07-25-10 11:36 AM CT (US)     25 / 943       
His post was 5hours? before Mashek posted. Mashek is the thread owner is he not?

~
[My Dropped RPG Project | Keltos - RPG] [My Finished Games | MGC09 - Where Am I + MGC11 - All For The Horse + Puzzle Racing] [My Current Project | Defense of The Towers]
~~~
A RPG Scenario You Should Play | Tsubasa's Tale | Another RPG Scenario You Should Play | IceQuest

[This message has been edited by Dtrungle (edited 07-25-2010 @ 11:37 AM).]

Dead_End
Cavalier
posted 07-25-10 11:44 AM CT (US)     26 / 943       
IMO, its still not bad considering how much effort he did in helping the community by his innumerous reviews.
Quality over quantity.
His post was 5hours? before Mashek posted. Mashek is the thread owner is he not?
Your point is?
Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 07-25-10 11:48 AM CT (US)     27 / 943       
helping the community by his innumerous reviews
I mean no disrespect to Possidon here, but the rules on Official reviewers were changed when he applied.
Quality over quantity.

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile
Dtrungle
Squire
posted 07-25-10 11:51 AM CT (US)     28 / 943       
Quality is over quantity. Though you can't deny that he gave some insight and most importantly, acknowledgement and motivation.

Are we agruing because Possidon's request wasn't up before his second request? If so, you should know what the point is.

~
[My Dropped RPG Project | Keltos - RPG] [My Finished Games | MGC09 - Where Am I + MGC11 - All For The Horse + Puzzle Racing] [My Current Project | Defense of The Towers]
~~~
A RPG Scenario You Should Play | Tsubasa's Tale | Another RPG Scenario You Should Play | IceQuest
Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 07-25-10 11:56 AM CT (US)     29 / 943       
No, we're arguing because you don't like me or dead end, and feel it necessary to troll everything serious we say.
Guthan, Tanks_fst and I have been waiting for a review of egressa for several months now, and we don't have one.
Does Possidon's request yesterday trump that? I didn't ask again the next day.

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile
John Mendl
Squire
posted 07-25-10 12:00 PM CT (US)     30 / 943       
Popey and Dead End, im well aware of this 'quality over quantity' but you cant deny the fact that he did so many reviews and did good help to the community. Unless his reviews were junk, which I didnt think so.

Infact, I was pretty sure atleast one of you would make this argument.
Dead_End
Cavalier
posted 07-25-10 12:03 PM CT (US)     31 / 943       
John, please don't extend your other argument to this thread.
Dtrungle
Squire
posted 07-25-10 12:04 PM CT (US)     32 / 943       
Pope, I comment back to you to make things clear, to point you to another thought, but you are always so thick that you never see the other side.

About D_E, I've never argued with him until today. Simply because of his out of context and ridiculous comments.

Also, possi's request was on an RMS, which can easily be reviewed. Yours is on a multiplayer game, who here reviews those?

~
[My Dropped RPG Project | Keltos - RPG] [My Finished Games | MGC09 - Where Am I + MGC11 - All For The Horse + Puzzle Racing] [My Current Project | Defense of The Towers]
~~~
A RPG Scenario You Should Play | Tsubasa's Tale | Another RPG Scenario You Should Play | IceQuest

[This message has been edited by Dtrungle (edited 07-25-2010 @ 12:06 PM).]

John Mendl
Squire
posted 07-25-10 12:07 PM CT (US)     33 / 943       
John, please don't extend your other argument to this thread.
I willnot and didnot do so (if you're hinting at that). What Im telling you in this thread has absolutely nothing to do with what im posting there.
Popeychops
"Cool" Huskarl
posted 07-25-10 12:08 PM CT (US)     34 / 943       
So, dt, you support people who bump threads asking for more reviews repeatedly?
Again, Possidon, I'm not meaning to be offensive towards you, just getting dtrungle to show what he thinks is acceptable and what isn't.
who reviews multiplayer?
146 Possidon: Single Player, Multiplayer,
84 Lord Basse*: Single Player, Multiplayer,
75 Mashek*: Single Player, Multiplayer,
47 Popeychops*: Single Player, Multiplayer,
16 Guthan: Single Player, Multiplayer,

Of which myself and Guthan made the file.
So thats three people, including possidon himself, who could review it.
Out of respect to the three, who must be busy people, I have not asked again.

Member of BlackForest Studios
Co-creator of Silent Evil (4.6) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2009 (Most Fave'd Multiplayer Scenario)
and The Seas of Egressa (4.8) Voted Best Multiplayer Scenario of 2010
"Popey just hates everywhere." - Chocolate Jesus, on my fear of Romanian organ-traffickers
"Hooray for Dear Leader-Comrade-Generalissimo-Presidente-Lord Protector Popey!" - Lord Sipia, on my benevolent, iron-fisted rule
"You're not Popeychops; you don't get to physics." - Moff, in response to a clumsy muon simile

[This message has been edited by Popeychops (edited 07-25-2010 @ 12:13 PM).]

Dead_End
Cavalier
posted 07-25-10 12:10 PM CT (US)     35 / 943       
willnot and didnot do so (if you're hinting at that). What Im telling you in this thread has absolutely nothing to do with what im posting there.
You have absolutely done no reviews at all. To me it seems like you were merely backing up Dtrungle (who I think can easily handle a discussion on his own) as he backed you up in the other thread. Until two days ago you had never set foot in this topic (or the previous one).
« Previous Page  1 2 3 ··· 10 ··· 20 ··· 27  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Kings Heaven | HeavenGames