Server reviewed \o/
-
Provided I didn't completely fail, there should be a link to a review of our server: http://minecraftreviews.net/2011/10/26/55/
If that didn't work, then just look up minecraftreviews.net.
7/10 isn't bad at all. They said we had a vanilla feel. I think that's what we were trying for so good job. Shame they couldn't have seen the old map. They'd be shocked with the feats we were able to accomplish with our vanilla! Also mentions of our economy plugin and clans. -
-
It's not the most comprehensive review... still, 7/10 isn't bad. I think he could have scored higher, though.
Send the heavies round. -
Hm. Yeah. Not very comprehensive. I feel like he just wandered around a bit, found there to be no major game-enhancing plugins, learned about the eco plugin and then left to make a rushed review before joining his own favorite server again.
No really, it's ridiculously short, and he isn't really giving us any reasons behind his points at all. -
did you guys read the previous review?
http://minecraftreviews.net/2011/10/25/server-review-ecocitycraft-810/
so, he wasn't able to ask/learn what plugins are on the server, but that the anti zombe's mod was cool? so us with our anti speed/fly hacking plugins obviously isn't as cool
looking at the previous reviews, it seems his one of ours is definitely bias. he contradicts himself and his opinions between reviews! -
It does feel a little lacking, and I cant see where the 7 points came from. Still, 7/10 is good, I guess?
I find it a bit misleading that the attitude here is that highly modded servers seem to becoming the default across vanilla, the way it was meant to be played.
Still, anyone who took out their time to write a review for the server, thank you. -
"This server was rated 7/10 for the following reasons: Little to no major features or minigames for the players to enjoy" How have they defined features? It seems that really, the no-nonsense attitude to griefing, does not seem to have been considered really, considering that to me, its a reason I stayed, and damn im glad i did. And as for it being almost entirely vannilla, he views that as a bad thing?!
-
-
Hotmage100
Well ... I just know ... HE DOESN'T ENJOY SURVIVING .......
yeah it seems by the tone in his writing that he's bored with vanilla minecraft, seeking out servers with as many mods as possible!
what still baffles me though is his lack of research into the CF:UK mods list, claiming that there aren't many. Then he praises another server for the mods that he confessed he doesn't really know the full extend of!
i think it should've been an 8/10 personally based on his way of reviewing.
of course mine would be a 10/10 but i'm bias too
-
-
Hotmage100
Mine would be 11/10 >:P
Why not just have 10 mean more, then your score wouldn't have to go to 11? -
-
Review was written by the player 0OTF. He was online for a few hours last night. I had to leave him alone and log off after he had been afk for about over an hour (Dinner break).
I did my best to show him around the server and tried to explain things, but I got the feeling that he didn't get to fully understand how we work.
I wished that there had been some more players online to show him around, and point out things that I hadn't had the chance to.
Anyway, thank you 0OTF for the review! -
I did get on before he left and tell him about the economy plug in to the best of my abilities... Then he thought he'd seen everything and left it seems. T.T
-
-
Hotmage100
Can't Be Explained But Very Good
Meh... Donno How To Explain xD
My post was a Spinal Tap reference
-
-
I'm starting to see these You're aYou're a Spinal Tap reference.
Kahreverywhere. And I love them, I lol'd. -
Reviews mean nothing. Iv seen reviews in PC Gamer over the years which state a game is utter crap but i found (Like loads of others) that the game is actually very good, and its just that the reviewer doesn't like that type of game. Most reviews are biest to the reviewers own beliefs and not done in a proper way.
Reviews that mean something are ones where people don't take there own personal views into account and look at what they are reviewing in an impartial way from the viewpoint of a person who would like that genre. Though hardly anyone reviews properly.
It looks like the guy just picked a random number off the top of his head. He never rearly wrote alot of good things about the server, yet it gets a 7... He makes a strong point about what he considers negatives which suggest it should get lower than a 7. His scoring is odd. -
beagrie
My post was a Spinal Tap reference
DAMMIT!
I got that as soon as I read it, and was hoping it hadn't been picked up on so that I could furnish the correct reply:
...
...
...
These go to 11. -
I think the bit about having no major minigames to play was a bit harsh we have dozens of spleef arenas and we have games regularly
-
There's also the minigame I love the most. It has two opposite sides, the staff, armed with their mighty Banhammers, and manurebrain assmasters armed with their fancy idea of "I break other peoples stuff, ergo, I'm a better person."
-
-
not a very good review, lack of detail, I still dont know how he took away three points instead of one or two because of the lack of features and "minigames" but a seven is still good
-
I guess I started a trend. I'm not hating it.
I'm starting to see these You're a <insert reference to beagries post here> everywhere.
Kahr
You're a Spinal Tap reference.
BRooNiE
