Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Path: gmd.de!ira.uka.de!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!uunet!pipex!uknet!pavo.csi.cam.ac.uk!gdr11
From: gdr11@cl.cam.ac.uk (Gareth Rees)
Subject: Adventure reviewing/criticism - how?
Message-ID: <1993May9.012314.12630@infodev.cam.ac.uk>
Sender: gdr11@cl.cam.ac.uk (G.D. Rees)
Nntp-Posting-Host: grange.cl.cam.ac.uk
Reply-To: gdr11@phx.cam.ac.uk
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK
Date: Sun, 9 May 1993 01:23:14 GMT
Lines: 18

When reviewing or criticising a book, it is necessary and wise to refer in some
detail to the plot, events and characters that make up the book.  I don't imagine
that there are many people who find their enjoyment of a novel is spoiled by
knowing in advance a broad outline of what the book is about.  But equally 
obviously a reviewer needs to take care when the plot depends upon tricks 
or twists or surprises.

But when criticising an adventure game, everything in the game is a twist or
trick or surprise and even knowing a little of what the game is about can spoil
the joy of having solved a problem all by oneself.  I felt able to talk about
Planetfall in detail because it's ten years old and because there are likely to 
be plenty of people who will have completed the game (or played it and given 
up in disgust) and so won't have it spoiled.

How then, can one go about reviewing a new adventure game?

-- 
Gareth Rees <gdr11@phx.cam.ac.uk>
