Album Rating: 5.0
i didnt even realize i got negged, haha, wow no one actually read it, they just judged it from the amount they read, which is completely stupid, you should all be banned, just kidding anyways what was not well written then? to the people who said that
Edit: actually you know what, im incredibly pissed, cuz i spent six fucking hours on this, and everyone is just negging it from the first three to four paragraphs.... so yeah pissed off now.This Message Edited On 09.15.08
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.4
Ok I read it (and still haven't negged it).
First, the review should focus entirely on the review. In other words you should have made the first paragraph a comment instead. The sentence before the TBT starts should be gone too for the same reason.
The history seemed rushed and you didn't really focus on letting it flow. Run on sentences, random periods, etc. Let me first start off by saying... Don't do that, just say it. Try to keep your reviews from becoming too converstational.
Even if TBTs are your thing try to focus on strengths and weaknesses not individual elements or play-by-plays. It will go faster which will make it come off less redundant sounding, and people will have less time to get bored.
That's really the main thing, IMO, that is wrong with this.
Edit: Also work on a stonger closing paragraph where you kind of sum up your main points.This Message Edited On 09.15.08
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0
I told you in the Metallica thread this was a bad idea. Should have listened.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
I negged it because no sane person will want to read a single-spaced 6 page review (as in, 12 double-spaced pages). Most college professors won't even bother reading it if a paper was that long, and just give it an F.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
Edit: actually you know what, im incredibly pissed, cuz i spent six ****ing hours on this, and everyone is just negging it from the first three to four paragraphs.... so yeah pissed off now.
There is no doubt in the back of my mind that you have a passion for this record, thats for sure. But keeping those ideas from trailing off can be a little hard sometimes. Please read advice given in your other reviews to keep yourself from writing like a mad man in the future and read some of your other fellow reviewers reviews too (the good ones hahaha).
Most of the time, being too wordy just drags a review right down to the ground, like repeat descriptions in TBT's etc.. The most concise reviews, while being really descriptive, are the best and easiest to read. There is my constructive criticism after reading this entire thing. Oh and also, I can spend days with an idea flowing around my head before I put it down on Word. Thats how I make my reviews concise.
|
| |
im not surprised that the reviewer is just as annoying here as on the forums
this is a bad review, too long, too redundant, doesn't embellish on anything new, and is too boring. people like concise, yet information-filled reviews, not long studies that analyze every riff and every click.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.4
told you in the Metallica thread this was a bad idea. Should have listened. You caught my attention so I had to find that thread. He was so excited about this review and the NEW format and how it might not make any sense now, but it will! What was that story about the dude with the wax wings that flew too close to the sun? Wait, maybe I've never read it, maybe I'm just thinking of the Thrice song that references it.
So, listen to The Wizard. He's wize beyond his years.This Message Edited On 09.15.08
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
What was that story about the dude with the wax wings that flew too close to the sun? Wait, maybe I've never read it, maybe I'm just thinking of the Thrice song that references it.
I nearly shit my pants with laughter.
So, listen to The Wizard. He's wize beyond his years.
Too kind good sir. I just tell it like it is. By the way Willie, you will love the album I'm reviewing right now. Here's a hint, starts with Neurosis and ends with Enemy of the Sun. I can't believe that album hasn't been reviewed. Since your a huge fan of Souls at Zero, I figure you would love that album too.
This Message Edited On 09.15.08
|
| |
Yeah, this is too long, but not deserving of 4 negs.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off
holy crap this is long.
Album rules though.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
Just for the record, I did not neg this despite my prick undertones.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.4
Here's a hint, starts with Neurosis and ends with Enemy of the Sun. I can't believe that album hasn't been reviewed. Since your a huge fan of Souls at Zero, I figure you would love that album too. And you would figure right. It's my third favorite. You wouldn't like my last review, but hey it's the first one to get featured out of 106 written.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
Reading it right now!
|
| |
tl;dr
|
| |
@Si1v3RfaNg: I'd take all the advice given to you here and utilise it. You may have spent so much energy into this review, but if it isn't even in a presentable format, no one's going to get through it.
Imagine if a film advertised a 6 hour length... not only are people not going to make the distance, some won't even turn up in the first place.
Regarding your 'concept review', remember the episode where Homer Simpson is given free reign to design a concept car of his choice?
You've shown that you're capable of writing decent material, you just need to present it in a more concise manner.This Message Edited On 09.15.08This Message Edited On 09.15.08
|
| |
if I have one suggestion for si1v3RfaNg is that you should ask someone whether or not an idea is good or not. Otherwise, this happens.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.4
if I have one suggestion for si1v3RfaNg is that you should ask someone whether or not an idea is good or not. Otherwise, this happens. He did in the Metallica thread of the R&M forum. Thor warned him against it.
|
| |
ugh
|
| |
"combination of acoustic and regular guitars"
^^^hahaha, gold
And "For Whom the Bell Tolls" is apparently about a scene in the book by the same name, written by Steinbeck (I think). Its a book about the Spanish Civil War.
|
| |
DN DN. DN DN. DUUUUUN. BWEOM BWEOM BWEOM BWEOM, BWEOM BWEOM BWEOM.
|
| |
|
|
