Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Portal (game)

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Portal (game)

This article has been submitted for review of content. Please feel free to mercilessly and ruthlessly edit and add content to the article, as long as it's not vandalism or just plain stupid, and as long as it fits the general tone of the article.

MacMania 21:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Sigh... I've now played Portal (in fact, MacMania's articles inspired me to buy it), and I have a few things to say about this article. But MacMania hasn't made an edit in 19 days, and I feel like I'd be wasting my breath. Mac! Are you still out there?

If he isn't... I kind of think we should close this Pee Review and flagellate ourselves for dereliction of duty. pillow talk 19:59, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Though maybe you could sing this one just to give us a laugh and incase he is still around. SK Sir Orian57Talk RotM 20:19 2 August 2008

Humo(u)r:	8	This is the kind of articles that I don't usually expect in a place like this. One thing that impresses me the most is the timing. It has all the punchlines located where they are best served without giving away their whereabouts to begin with, and that's the kind of quailty that all good comedies ought to have. Another thing is that, in contrast to out mighty collection of kitsch, it makes subtle parodies of things in real life without stating the obvious and is thus able to hit hard at Internet trends in general and our human tendency to make up names for categories and genres within just a few words. Some people might think the otherwise, but to me it was a joy ride.
Concept:	8	It is commendable that you did not even consider going into the tedious mechanics of this particular video game. Instead, you chose to observe from a third-person perspective and attempt to analyze not just one aspect, but all aspects of it from the designing process right down to the gaming experience and all the hypes and vibes around it. It doesn't give me the impression of being monotonic or too focused on something that doesn't matter at the end of the day. It is definitely penned by someone who really lives in our midst rather than someone's basement. For that this article deserves an honorable mention.
Prose and Formatting:	7	Aside from some minor inconsistencies in tenses, I don't see much of any problem in this particular piece of writing. The aesthetic, although not entirely outstanding, isn't bad either.
Images:	8	I think many of us are above the "cheese monkey" kind of levels. Some people like splattering lots and lots of hedious (and, sometimes, irrelevant) images onto their articles in an attempt to impress unsuspecting reader. Images are best served in a wiki when they truly reinforce the texts that they accompany. And guess what? I think this article has got that right here.
Miscellaneous:		N/A
Final Score:	38.75	A fine piece of writing deserving the front page honor - at least, that's what I think.
Reviewer:	JoeMonco 18:11, 3 August 2008 (UTC)