I am sure that you have often, after finishing reading another review, have asked "Daaaaaamn! How they DO that?!" This must be a pressing topic on everyone's mind I'm sure, and far be it from us to keep such critical secrets to ourselves. So, because it's easier to write this than hook up a TV tuner card like I should be doing, Salamando's Stove is semi-happy to present a behind-the-scenes look at article writing. I am a pure and honest Christmas!
STEP ONE: CONCEPTION
The conception of which game, among the thousands, will be singled out - chosen - transended - by a review - is a very long and complicated one. Usually it starts out while Evk and WrexSoul have conversations on ICQ:
As you can see, this is a very scientific process with little room for error. This process means that reviews are never so boring that they need bouncing breasts to spice them up. Ahem.
STEP TWO: PLAYING THE GAME
This phase is where Evk does everything but play the game for several days. This process helps him focus mentally so that when he DOES get around to playing the game, he can dispense timeless wisdom that sheds light onto even the most complex game, such as the following: "There's some sort of plot, but if you care about that you can go play the fucking game yourself". Bravo!
Evk also takes screenshots at this time, being sure to take screenshots while "STATE SAVED" is still in the lower-left hand corner if he's playing a SNES game. Which he almost always is, because nobody wants to see reviews of PlayStation games. No, everyone wants six year old super nintendo games with comments about them like "I don't know what's going on with this game because I'm a fucking idiot".
STEP 3: BRIEF COUNTERATTACK BREAK
Brief counterattack break.
What, did you think we were joking or something?
Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4
Written by Evk and WrexSoul and was posted on 4-29-01.
This feature is ©2000 Nick Hammer and his cat.
firstname.lastname@example.org, you communists.