Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/killzone

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Killzone

Teh doctor 10:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Humo(u)r:	3	When I looked at this, I wondered how many video game-related articles had actually managed to go onto the front page. In fact, I wasn't sure I really wanted to review it, because, like most other video game-related articles, it was cluttered with lame puns and Internet comedy cliches that had beaten the proverbial dead horse long before my great-grandfather was born. Seriously, Chuck Norris? Did you think that someone would have a chuckle reading the article when you were writing that part? Becuase, honestly, I tell you - it's an eye sore. What's worse is that nothing in the article is actually funny, and I don't think even the Man himself is able to change that part of the reality.
Concept:	3	Killzone is an over-hyped lackluster console game filled with design issues and glitches. If you really want to write something about it, then why not just focus on what it fails to deliver instead of, say, the console that it runs on? Competition within the video game market isn't news. Wasting your time fluffing about it isn't exactly going to help your cause. Put the focus back on the subject matter, or it's just a matter of time that someone comes around and tosses this pile of waffles into the bon fire.
Prose and Formatting:	3	Let's face it - this article is butt ugly. I am quite sure there's an instruction or two in the Beginner's Guide on how to use those title markups properly, and really, how many more quotes do you want cram into this one article? Because as far as I know Uncyclopedia isn't exactly a fake quote repository, and often the more quotes people use the less funny and more messy the article gets, and combined with a lengthy, poorly-paragraphed introduction and a list of random items, these quotes simply make the article an utter visual chaos.
Images:	5	You know what's ironic? That, like the last picture says in the description, I am not getting it. And when I say "it", I mean "the entirety of the article", and that includes the reason that the pictures are there.
Miscellaneous:		N/A
Final Score:	17.5	An ugly, unreadable mess. Like the game itself, the value of this article's existence is minimal, although the results would have been much better had the author focused on the subject matter rather than the less-weighty side issues and the pattering of Internet comedy cliches.
Reviewer:	JoeMonco 03:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)