Remove this ad

#21 [url]

May 11 15 1:56 PM

I checked the author's twitter, and really she seems harmless, but acts like a SJW

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#22 [url]

May 11 15 2:52 PM

Check the tumblr. Definitely SJW.

_____________________________________________________________________

People have a common defense mechanism they employ to defend themselves from the threat of contrary viewpoints. This shield they wield is the act of dismissing such contrary viewpoints by arbitrarily undermining their validity.

Quote    Reply   

#26 [url]

May 11 15 3:58 PM

That one girl eats like she's high.

_____________________________________________________________________

People have a common defense mechanism they employ to defend themselves from the threat of contrary viewpoints. This shield they wield is the act of dismissing such contrary viewpoints by arbitrarily undermining their validity.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

izzus

Heavy User

Posts: 294

#31 [url]

May 12 15 6:39 PM

The review sounds more like you (understandably) hate SJWs more than the comic.
If you gotta hate on them keep it minimal. Like one or two remarks at most.
The review is about the comic, not them.

I found a good quote while browsing edf2, said something to the like of "if your sexuality is the most interesting thing about you, you must be a really boring person."
If you ask me I'd start the review off with that and tie it in to how shitty the characters are. And never touch the sjw thing unless necessary.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Sindy

Living Spambot

Posts: 833

#34 [url]

May 12 15 10:31 PM

Courage, you seem to have signed up for the forums just for this and rush straight to reviewing. Do you have a personal gripe with the comic or artist? Because usually that type of review ends up shit and the regulars need to either delete it, clean it up a lot or rewrite it fully.

I don't care if you hate the artist because she took your sweet roll, but don't make it a subjective and hateful review.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Sindy

Living Spambot

Posts: 833

#35 [url]

May 12 15 11:04 PM

Double post because I'm on mobile, but your timeline in the background is really off - gamergate has jack shit to do with the insanity and fancy sexualities of SJWs, that already was a thing when gamergate took off, because if it wasn't, the arguments about cis white males being the only gamers wouldn't have existed. Gamergate is when SJWs crawled off tumblr and seeped into real life and "adults" hopped the bandwagon and it became relevant if journalisists, celebrities, game devs and your mcdonalds cashier are SJW or cis white males. Sjws were a thing on tumblr and had a bazillion fake identities created loooooooong before gg. So either check things properly or avoid writing unfunny and wrong statements about them.

Once again, if you mean this simply as a personal attack, let someone else write it or distance yourself and make it actually funny.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Bertbutt

Heavy User

Posts: 214

#36 [url]

May 13 15 6:36 AM

I haven't read the comic, but I can't let a writing review pass through like that. While 'poorly constructed tumblrisms' may be a good shorthand for what you mean there are people on the internet who don't spend time on tumblr and are only vague about its workings, and they're not going to understand what you mean. Additionally, "spouting some random tumblr "equality" gobble de gook" can be even more confusing. I would suggest elaborating that the writer's idea of equality is shallow and one dimensional, and always solved in the same hippie "love will find a way!" but somehow even more insulting to the reader, and then provide examples. I would also say to write your review in a way that the reader doesn't have to read most of the comic to understand your points. If I have to read the comic, I might as well not read the review, and if the creator sees it, they can easily shoot it down as being vague and unhelpful.

I mean, we'll laugh at them either way, but when they have a point, it's not nearly as funny

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Kraken

Forum Leech

Posts: 483

#37 [url]

May 13 15 6:44 AM

courage136dog wrote:
Booop, so I just came up with a draft for the review http://pastebin.com/8fQi9iyu
 

The review is a bit short on substance and long on complaining about the current state of internet culture. I would suggest you try to write with a few ideas in mind:

1) Imagine you're writing to a reader who does not know about or care about Gamergate, Tumblr, etc. How do you explain this comic?
2) Imagine you're writing to a reader who's seeing this review 2 years from now, when all of the surrounding issues you're speaking are old, stale news.
3) Try to give someone a complete enough overview of the comic so they don't have to go read it themselves to figure out what's going on.

So, bit by bit:
BACKGROUND: This section is the only one you've got fully fleshed-out, which makes it seem like this is what you care about more than the comic itself. It might be all right if there were more substance to the review.
DOWNFALL: It's fair to say a comic was never good.
STORY AND PLOT: You're right, what you wrote is a cop-out. I only glanced through about the first 20 pages or so of the comic and I can tell there is a story, there is a plot, there are distinct characters. None of that makes it good, but to brush it off the way you do is not doing your review justice.
ART REVIEW: You're trying to be clever with a put-down rather than convey substance. I see nothing like Picasso or Escher in the art style, so when you use that metaphor it doesn't communicate anything valuable to me. Yes, the art is simplistic, clumsy, and shows no signs of improvement. It certainly gets in the way of understanding the comic. There's plenty you can say about it fairly.
WRITING REVIEW: Again, there is a story in this comic. What you're doing here is grinding your axe against certain people you don't like, not reviewing the comic itself. Here's the thing: any storyteller who puts an agenda first over the story is going to put out crap. It doesn't matter what the agenda is. It doesn't matter whether you're sympathetic with the agenda or not. Give some specific examples of how the author is using characters as cut-outs for their agenda instead of treating them as people. Go a bit deeper.
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY: If you don't know much about the author, just say you can't find out much. To say the comic is written by a statistic, not a person, actually makes you sound incredibly creepy. It's sociopathic to reduce people to non-human status, you understand. You can be critical without going that far.

Oh, and please don't say "boop" when you deliver something. It comes off as cutesy.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Long Tom

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,101

#38 [url]

May 13 15 9:26 AM

Kraken wrote:

courage136dog wrote:
Booop, so I just came up with a draft for the review http://pastebin.com/8fQi9iyu

 

The review is a bit short on substance and long on complaining about the current state of internet culture. I would suggest you try to write with a few ideas in mind:

1) Imagine you're writing to a reader who does not know about or care about Gamergate, Tumblr, etc. How do you explain this comic?
2) Imagine you're writing to a reader who's seeing this review 2 years from now, when all of the surrounding issues you're speaking are old, stale news.
3) Try to give someone a complete enough overview of the comic so they don't have to go read it themselves to figure out what's going on.

So, bit by bit:
BACKGROUND: This section is the only one you've got fully fleshed-out, which makes it seem like this is what you care about more than the comic itself. It might be all right if there were more substance to the review.
DOWNFALL: It's fair to say a comic was never good.
STORY AND PLOT: You're right, what you wrote is a cop-out. I only glanced through about the first 20 pages or so of the comic and I can tell there is a story, there is a plot, there are distinct characters. None of that makes it good, but to brush it off the way you do is not doing your review justice.
ART REVIEW: You're trying to be clever with a put-down rather than convey substance. I see nothing like Picasso or Escher in the art style, so when you use that metaphor it doesn't communicate anything valuable to me. Yes, the art is simplistic, clumsy, and shows no signs of improvement. It certainly gets in the way of understanding the comic. There's plenty you can say about it fairly.
WRITING REVIEW: Again, there is a story in this comic. What you're doing here is grinding your axe against certain people you don't like, not reviewing the comic itself. Here's the thing: any storyteller who puts an agenda first over the story is going to put out crap. It doesn't matter what the agenda is. It doesn't matter whether you're sympathetic with the agenda or not. Give some specific examples of how the author is using characters as cut-outs for their agenda instead of treating them as people. Go a bit deeper.
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY: If you don't know much about the author, just say you can't find out much. To say the comic is written by a statistic, not a person, actually makes you sound incredibly creepy. It's sociopathic to reduce people to non-human status, you understand. You can be critical without going that far.

Oh, and please don't say "boop" when you deliver something. It comes off as cutesy.

Looking at the reviews written by others would help.
For story and plot, describe enough of a comic's story to give enough of an idea of what it's about, or what sort of plot problems the story has.
For art, I recommend writing things like thick or thin lines, use of color and/or shading, proportions, perspective, backgrounds, animation, etc.  Even if the style is like something familiar (Sabrina-Online being like Looney Tunes characters), you need to describe it in reasonable detail.
Also, it is needed to place one picture-any picture-from the actual webcomic.  If feasible, try to place a whole strip or page from it.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

fallinq

Heavy User

Posts: 292

#39 [url]

May 13 15 9:55 AM

I pretty much agree with what's been said above. Focus on the comic, not the politics.

Also, maybe you could include something in the review like this. For webcomics, it's a long time coming:

Fallinq's Guide to Characters and Sexuality for Webcomic Authors

1. If you can't easily name at least five traits of a character that don't relate to the character's sexuality, you have a VERY flat character. This might work for a side character in a comedy, but for a main character or serious comic? It's gonna get old fast. And make sure those traits are actually visible in the comic, not just in your head.

2. If your comic's plot revolves entirely around excuses for various characters to have sex, you're making a porn comic. If it has no explicit sex scenes but still entirely revolves around excuses for various characters to have sex, you're making a porn comic with the sex scenes censored. And people love to watch porn with the sex scenes removed, right?

3. Not every gay person has lots of sex with multiple partners. Depicting them as such is not only unrealistic, it's a stereotype started by people who tended to not be too fond of gay people.

4. Heterosexual is by far the most common sexual orientation. Unless you're doing a fantasy or sci fi comic where there's a specific reason for it, it's totally unrealistic to make every single character in your comic be gay or bi.

5. If every heterosexual character (or heterosexual male) in your comic is evil, you're making all kinds of unfortunate implications and come across like you have personal issues. If every heterosexual male is a dumb jock and every heterosexual female is a ditzy cheerleader type, you might as well have a black character that talks in ebonics and eats fried chicken and watermelon. If you don't like one kind of stereotype, don't use another. It's called hypocrisy.

6. If you think rape is hawt when it's gay, you need to seriously think about what that says about you as a person.

Last Edited By: fallinq May 13 15 9:58 AM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   

#40 [url]

May 13 15 12:55 PM

my draft was really poop wasn't it. i didn't actually rush to join, i've just known about it for 4 years, and i've only read a couple of reviews, and most of them were kind of funny, some were weird. i made a lot of mistakes with my draft, it was really bad, and i haven't really known about burgeroise until a week ago when i stumbled upon this

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help