Here, I will give some MASTERFUL CRITIQUES
~~~
The "grab your gear" line is really corny, I don't know why you would write that. Also, improper use of the colon. Try "...reviewing the Battlefield 2 mod "Forgotten Hope 2."
That's nice, but as someone who has never heard of the mod, this doesn't interest me. You don't even say what the mod's about or why it's so eagerly anticipated. You should be telling me WHY I want to play this mod, instead of talking about how you wanted to play it.
You're still in the intro here, and you're starting to review the mod without having mentioned a "Forgotten Hope 1." Wouldn't that be the first thing to cover, to establish context? Was Forgotten Hope 1 a big success? What game was it for? How have the developers promised Forgotten Hope 2 will improve on the original?
Beyond that, you're not really specifying how it "shines." Custom menus and music sound like standard-issue mod features to me. Wouldn't be better to tell me what the mod is
about first?
This seems kind of redundant and obvious--the "discuss the different topics" line is something you could have left out entirely, and the rest should be put at the end of the review.
Again, you should be using the intro to build interest in what you're about to say. So far, I know nothing about the mod except that it's for Battlefield 2 and it's called Forgotten Hope 2. And I knew that from the title
Now we're starting to get some information, but there's too much autobiographical stuff. Joining a map isn't interesting. Talk about yourself less, about the mod more. Instead of saying "I was excited" or "I was impressed" let that show through in your writing.
Also, you mentioned historical accuracy--I take it this is some kind of World War 2 mod?
Writing is still kind of self-centered. There's some very awkward English here, stuff like "something to truly be in awe about" and the entire sentence about "blurry vision" make it sound like a kid on a forum writing about his favorite new mod.
Also "don’t stand around staring at the pretty sights for too long, or you’ll end up dead" is corny as hell. Is it meant to be funny? It doesn't make the review sound "causal," it just makes me squirm
More talking about yourself here, and more awkward English, particularly "I really do not take much care or consideration into how awesome or poor their sounds are." And that's followed by "when playing Forgotten Hope 2, you cannot help but feel like you are diving right into the battlefield," a jarring switch from first to second person that sounds like you're trying to dictate my opinion to me.
"The sounds are superb in the mod, and that’s all there is to it." <--If that's all there is to it, why is there so much more text around this sentence? You should consider getting rid of the categories and just writing a straight review, so that if you don't have much to say about a particular aspect you can mention it in passing.
This made me snicker.
Come on dude, don't just say "I have no idea what war is like but I bet this is pretty close to it!" How is it realistic? Is it in the damage modelling? Realistic weather? Do the weapons have complex loading/firing procedures? Maybe an emphasis on tactics?
That's quite a claim.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but considering I've never heard of this mod before, to say that anyone remotely interested in first person shooters is just setting yourself up for failure.
This makes me curious to know--is it an asymmetrical balance? Do the two teams each have their own equipment, their own strengths and weaknesses? Based on how realistic you said it was I would assume so. But then, you haven't mentioned it. So I'm inclined to think not. Which makes it sound like another generic WWII shooter.
I had to read the "slots" thing twice before I figured out what you meant. Maybe "the game limits the number of players who can play as any given class at a time" would be clearer. This is similar to Team Fortress 2, I would draw a comparison there.
You're talking about yourself again. This stuff can largely be said without putting in "I saw" or "I thought" or "...impressed me." Unless you're going to tell thrilling or hilarious stories about your ingame exploits, reading about you playing the game isn't interesting. Try to avoid it.
"Covering fire is something to be found quite frequently" is written in a really bizarre form of passive voice. It's disconcerting to see stuff like this when you're using words like "exemplary" in the next paragraph up.
"Plays their cards right" is a horrible cliche, and not at all appropriate in the context anyway. Try to avoid that kind of stuff.
This could shake the reader's faith in you as a reviewer--you're so quick to excuse anything that goes wrong. You're here to sniff out any possible flaws in the mod, not to be its butt-buddy.
Keep in mind that a portion of your readers will not be as excited to play this mod as you are, and if the review reads like you're the developer's mom or something, they're going to start making Colbert faces at you.
If navigation was tough, just say so. If you decide it was just you being bad at the game, it's probably not worth mentioning at all.
Haha, bad use of immaculate there, cause you just explained how it wasn't immaculate. Yadadamean.
It's fine to say "the flaws are minor and don't really detract from the overall playing experience" but you use so much hyperbole when you do it that you come off as more of a slavering fanboy than an impartial reviewer.
My first thought reading this is "Didn't the mod just come out?"
There...weren't enough maps for you to play all day without running out? I imagine that's true of most online games, unless you're playing something like UT2004.
The average player isn't going to play all day, so like I said you should be comparing the number of maps to similar games and mods.
Yes. It's good that I won't mind playing in these
multiplayer maps more than once.
Again, it's not your job to make excuses for the mod's shortcomings.
Would have been good to know at the beginning of the review. I was imagining guys running around in France this whole time.
Not to make demands here, but what would have been great would be if you either researched this or contacted the developers directly, and found out whether they planned to release additional content. You're on PlanetBattlefield! You're a high roller! Be a journalist!
Hey, I have that game
That's that awkward English again! Also, what if I hate the WWII era? WHAT THEN?
Your review doesn't really seem to mention that we've been playing World War 2 shooters for like ten years now and lots of people are starting to get mighty sick of them. Nothing in the review makes me think that this one is going to be any different, aside from nebulous claims of "realism."
Yay.
Content? What? You mean it's a good mod, and it has maps?
God damn it you had to close with more cornball didn't you
In closing, there's a few points I'd like to emphasize:
-The writing seems to swing between corny ("let's hit the dirt men!"), stiff ("I enjoyed this mod very much"), and inappropriately didactic ("watch out for land mines, and don't stand in one place too long!").
-There are incredibly awkward phrases in some places, and very "big" words in others, making it sound like you used a thesaurus, or at least that you were trying to sound intellectual. That's a big turn-off when reading a review.
-As mean as this is going to sound, the people want blood. The most entertaining reviews are always the bad ones. So you should be structuring your review almost as if it were a samurai fight between you and the mod. If it turns out to be a good one, you lower your sword and grudgingly admit to being impressed. If it turns out to be REALLY good you can even say "my son, you are a true warrior." People will be more inclined to believe your reviews if you sound like you really put the game through the shredder, whereas if you spend the whole time going "this mod is so great omg omg it's AWESOME," they'll be like "wut"
~~~
Anyway that is my review of your review! Hope I didn't offend you, none of it's meant personally or anything. Just trying to help lol
Peace doggz