It's almost wholly positive, except for the bit where the reviewer
says, "The story feels a little lacking in originality at times." What's that supposed to mean? I mean, has he played many meteorology-based gamebooks before?
I am aware that this last comment may come across as a little petty, but it annoys me when reviewers make such sweeping statements without backing them up. What was it about the adventure that lacked originality? Going down a Dwarf mine in a drilling machine and battling a giant golem made of rusted pit props? Exploring the inside of a volcano? Battling the villain aboard a flying brass fish? And if it's so unoriginal, why give it 9 out of 10?
Reading reviews can be a harrowing experience, but if somebody makes a criticism I always try to take it on board, as I am always striving to improve as a writer and if nobody ever comments on your work you're never going to know where you need to up your game.
So, 9 out of 10 - great! Sweeping generalisations without any examples to back them up - a tad annoying.
Until next time...
No comments:
Post a Comment