00:00
00:00
ADR3-N
I make beats, metal, samples, patches, dnb, original game soundtracks, RVC voice models, and Russian/ English translation covers. Follow for monthly music producer freebies! Рада помочь русскоговорящим. Семплы вложены в ссылках вниз)))

Age 30

делаю хиты 8)

говно

США

Joined on 9/3/06

Level:
28
Exp Points:
8,592 / 8,700
Exp Rank:
4,720
Vote Power:
6.99 votes
Audio Scouts
10+
Art Scouts
5
Rank:
Sergeant
Global Rank:
1,526
Blams:
1,097
Saves:
4,777
B/P Bonus:
24%
Whistle:
Gold
Trophies:
10
Medals:
94
Supporter:
6y 9m 18d

How to (Properly) Review Content

Posted by ADR3-N - January 12th, 2017


Hey Newgrounds regs, ADR3-N here with another help resource, How to Review Anything, the Right Way -- and yes, I mean anything -- constructively, according to Newgrounds' rules and nettiquette. Pay attention, and you might even score some medals!


Now it may seem common sense, but if you've been around NG, you've seen enough useless reviews to know why proper constructive criticism is important. Still, maybe you're confused about what exactly separates a "useless" review from a "helpful" one, or what your average review is supposed to encompass.


Perhaps you're even looking to bolster the number of reviews under your belt without having to worry about lesser quality ones disappearing, or how to write reviews more efficiently without sacrificing quality. Statwhores, I'm looking at you.


Well, whether you're trying to break your first 10k reviews without the hassle or just curious about how to leave proper feedback, this guide is for you. Let's get started.


What are reviews? What's their purpose, and why are they important?


It might seem like a stupid question, but reviews and comments are a staple of any user-created content site. YouTube, SoundCloud, DeviantArt, even Facebook, they all have some form of commenting system, often with comment threads where people go back and forth about things that aren't even remotely related to the actual content they're viewing.


YouTube is pretty much a giant cess pool -- great example of what happens when you have a big community with little guidance on what it can or can't talk about in the comments. Just look at this shit.


127276047_stupid-youtube-comments-eminem.png


This is why we can't have nice things -- or rather, why Newgrounds doesn't have a threaded comment system. The General Forum [was] cancer enough. (RIP)


However, some sites have more direct alternatives; you'll notice DeviantArt has a critique system. This is most similar to what we have here, scored reviews, which are regulated with help from the userbase and a team of moderators. Unlike the scores that rank our content numerically, these are actually the driving force behind the ever-improving body of work we see from the great artists, animators, and music producers endemic to Newgrounds.


Think about it. Would any of us as newcomers have been motivated to keep submitting content if no one ever bothered to say, "Hey bud, your stuff right here is crap, but there's this one thing I like about it that you should keep doing," or vice versa?


Well, this is what a good review does: it tells people what they're getting right, what they're getting wrong, and how to step up to the plate better prepared next time they're making a submission, without the flame wars, verbal garbage, and drama inherent in other communities.


This keeps creators motivated and opens up new avenues for fresh and improving content -- because a Newgrounds review isn't an opportunity for people to get brownie points for making asses of themselves; it's an opportunity for the creator to learn something.


In fact, this is precisely the reason our site isn't subject to a plague of amusingly accurate Star Trek memes like the sterling example below, and probably what we owe our staying power to.


127278263_lj3q3kx.jpg


Accurate af.



So, what separates good reviews from bad? How can I write reviews that won't get deleted?


Let's start off with what a proper review strives to accomplish -- telling the creator what they got right, what they got wrong, and how they could possibly improve, if you know. There's plenty of leeway since each submission is different, but if you keep that in mind, you and your reviews should be safe.


Just remember your absolute DON'Ts:


  • DON'T write anything that breaks Newgrounds review guidelines
  • DON'T ask about anything unrelated to the author or submission
  • DON'T talk about breaking NG rules. This will get you banned
  • DON'T accuse the submission, author, or reviewers of breaking rules
  • DON'T leave one word reviews. Even a sentence can be meaningful
  • DON'T mass review without offering any useful comments about the work
  • DON'T ask to be scouted or advertise your own work
  • DON'T ask the user to upload something else aside from an update
  • DON'T aim personal attacks at any other users
  • DON'T solicit and just be a douche in general
  • DON'T plagiarize other reviews


Pretty simple. Stay on topic, keep it clean, and make sure your reviews don't look like these:


127273281_abusive_review.jpg

127275228_ngbbs41b364309c219.jpg

127272572_ngbbs56686c72c0598.png


Additionally, if you find any reviews like this, flag them as useless or abusive -- the latter if they explicitly break Newgrounds rules, such as in the case of reviews containing personal attacks, accusing anyone of theft or rule breaking.


@NekoMika has said that reviews asking to be scouted or soliciting uploads aren't written-in-stone abusive, but she and most review mods will remove them anyway.


@RohantheBarbarian's slightly dated Abusive Review Guide goes back and forth on the topic. You can find more examples of abusive reviews and resources, there. There's also @Hacsev's Abusive Review Quiz, which is a pretty good assessment in identifying helpful, useless, and abusive reviews, and @Psychopath's Whistle Cow Crew.


Now, why the distinction between useless and abusive? Useless reviews can and do get the chop, but flagging a review that simply reads "shit" the same as you would a review that says "you are shit" is an error. One is a useless review, and the other is a personal attack.


If you see more than one single-word review by the same person that just says "shit", then these fall under the "don't make tons of crappy reviews just to up your stats" rule, and you can flag them abusive.


There are some exceptions to the general rule, such as instances when reviews containing long strings of gibberish are actually level exports from games like Punk-o-matic 2. For the purposes of this guide though, just don't write useless and abusive reviews. It's not worth it.


If you have questions about reviews, you can send a PM to review mods such as @Malachy, @NekoMika, and @Exedor, too.


Now, that we've covered what not to do, your absolute DOs:


  • DO always pay attention to the submission in its entirety
  • DO try to give feedback to the best of your ability
  • DO talk about what the author got right
  • DO talk about what the author got wrong, and try not to be a dick about it
  • DO offer advice and alternative methods and improvements, if you have any


Basically, the less humorous version of @JujubeLock's How Not to Write Abusive Reviews.


Since there were fewer images of helpful reviews than I'd hoped for, I figure I'll just rip some that I personally found helpful. Note that you don't have to know a lot of terminology to leave a good review, but it does help!


127275851_Helpfulreview1.png

127273619_helpfulreview2.png

127276589_helpfulreview3.png


Not all helpful reviews have to be long or detailed, but the more detail, naturally, the more helpful and constructive.


Sometimes, there isn't much to say about a short animation, simple art piece, or tiny loop though, and even something as simple as "Decent but could really use more detail" is about as good of a comment as you can leave. No shame.


That's about all there is when it comes to leaving good reviews. I'm sure you're wondering by now when my next book comes out, and I really need to get back to writing on things for this masterpost of resources. See ya!



Closing footnote, if you're mentioned here, I probably used your content as a resource in this guide-slash-filibuster. Special thanks to @Psychopath, @RohantheBarbarian, @Hacsev, @Tekcos, @splap, @Asandir, @JujubeLock, @TaintedLogic, @Daydream-Anatomy, @CyberDevil, @NekoMika, @Malachy, @Exedor, and many others for your contributions in making Newgrounds great!

 


Tags:

2

Comments

I will provide helpful advice to anyone who asks. For $5.
I remove large strings of level code when that's the only substance in the review. And charge $5.
Asking to be scouted gets your request and/or review deleted. ...$5.
@NekoMika owes me ...$3.28.

Hahah, how much money you made to date? xD

Course you gotta choose one of my reviews with a typo in it. XD Hope I don't have more of those than I think I do hmm, maybe I'll start re-reading a bit more after this. Do appreciate the mention! And good guide, albeit with a bit much don'ts and few do's. I assume lots of users just aren't very good at formulating constructive critique, even if they know it's better. Hopefully they won't be discouraged from writing at all, since even short and positive (but non-constructive) comments are better than none. Maybe the process behind writing a good review could be something to delve into too? Like how to use the sandwich method, or focus on the work; not the person, etcetc...

Don't think anybody actually writes more than one single-word review saying something like 'shit' to up their stats btw. If that is their purpose, it'd make sense for them to spam positive reviews instead, but regardless, tons of crappy reviews are of course no good. I feel like the guidelines could be phrased better on that one point. Maybe once upon a time all the 'shit' reviews really were for that purpose. Feels like users aren't as concerned about their counts now as they used to be overall.

Anyway: good read! Thanks for making these educationaries.

Actually, if you think there's some stuff that could be rephrased or added to the guide, drop it here and I'll make an edit. I'm naturally a wordy person but a decent editor, so determining what to squeeze in/out isn't hard for me. Figuring out concise phrasing on the other hand is!

Thanks for checking out the guide!

Thanks so much for the shout-out! I deeply appreciate the effort you've put into showing people how to make helpful content and support our community. :)

Thank you! And thanks for leaving such helpful, thoughtful reviews!

Nice to see a little domestic anouncement here on how to make/keep it nice here. Though trolls are gonna be trolls, we always gonna keep that shit as long as there is internet. But for the people with the will to have a shared good time here, this is handy.

Though I don't agree with your argument on newgrounds' comment system. Even if there would be no idiots on NG's comment section, I still prefer this one over the system youtube has.
Having it like this makes the author have the last word, wich I think is valid, cause the comment section is for comments aimed at the author of a post, not a big discussion place for anyone to blabber around.
Also, if you have one place to say your saying with more text (opposed to a lot of things to say with little text on youtube) it forces you more to think and put your thoughts together in one place.

And even with the trolls, I still see better reviews here than on youtube Even if I don't care for the content, I sometimes still can get a good little read out of the comments here there. Though it sometimes can get a little hard to find a good read from time to time: like a lot of Shadman's fans, either there are just to many idiot following his stuff, or the ones with something to say are just being too quiet...

Yeah, you bring up a good point. And porn in general is just a good place to find useless, shit reviews, or spam. The types of people who actually have critique to share are few and far between. Glad you enjoyed the read.

"Perhaps you're even looking to bolster the number of reviews under your belt without having to worry about lesser quality ones disappearing, or how to write reviews more efficiently without sacrificing quality. Statwhores, I'm looking at you."

Ericho is the "best" example of the sort of behavior, by the way.

Ericho, DoctorStrongbad, XwaynecoltX, although Strongbad's reviews aren't too bad.

thx for the tips

Welcome!

"Would any of us as newcomers have been motivated to keep submitting content if no one ever bothered to say, "Hey bud, your stuff right here is crap, but there's this one thing I like about it that you should keep doing," or vice versa?"

This; a hundred times this. That's why I always try my hardest to leave the most positive/helpful review I can, whether I enjoyed the content or not. Everyone needs just a little encouragement every once in a while, though people should know that they're not going to be the best thing ever right out of the gate. Slash the ego, and build from the foundation.

A lot of my older reviews were pretty garbage though, I will admit. Slowly starting to become more active on the site and I'm seeing a lot of what you talked about in your guideline. Great read, really brings light to the subject.

I won't say my reviews are the greatest really -- actually, they're pretty short and to the point, and sometimes a little curt, depending on if something seems intentionally shitty. I just see a lot of absolutely useless reviews like "food", "amazing", "shit", or "why even try". Some people also break the rules by saying something is stolen, asking to be scouted, or etc. in their reviews, which is a no-no. Glad to see like-minded people are out there though. Gives me hope in the community. :)

@BronxBrother, it looks like you need to read this.

Good to know I'm still internet famous

Hey, you're alive! <3

Amazing blog, this will be useful and used as partial reference (it will be linked in my "references and footnotes" part of my future blog) for a future blog of my series "Newgrounds Adventures". Thank you, I enjoyed every bit of it *_* because it's really helpful and gives an insight to those who might not even know the distinction between a review and a comment.

People don't realize that this website might even be a nice tool to develop cognitive skills such as developing the ability to evaluate between abusive and useless, between flag worthy and not, between a blam and a save, and even writing abilities. Again thank you^^

Oh geez, I forgot that I wrote this a long time ago! Time to update xD Thanks for reading!

Think I might fix this up and add it as a section to my book as well. Can't hurt. @ me for your next blog!

@ADR3-N Of course my guide is intended for users who are starting to know the site and are unsure how things are (similarly to what I did with my B/P beginner guide), so I don't rule out there will be errors, due to my younger experience compared to yours or other seasoned people here^^
Plus these guides are based more on my personal experience and lots of reading through forum threads (both old and new) and posts that can be found in the internet web archive.

Sure I will mention you, I usually write down the name of the person and copy-paste the link to their profile because I don't want to disturb people with my @, but since you gave me permission to mention you in the blog I will do that way^^

Have a nice day!

For future reference, I prefer to be @ spammed! If I'm not spammed, in all likelihood I will miss the update T_T

It sounds like you're having an interesting deep dive! I love myself some internet history. In that case it should be a fascinating read, and I can't wait!

@ADR3-N Ok, I will spam you then!

Yeah, I am collecting some data from the web archive to see how the site was back at the end of the 1990s and during the automation of the Portal. I even made a playlist about Newgrounds's archeology if we want to call it like that XD
I don't like spamming my stuff on other people's blogs or works so I will just tell you that in the previous blog to today's one on birds, I talked about some future plans between guides for beginners and precisely this sort of "archaeological" research of the history of NG for generations to come. For example I've discovered the very first Pico's school walkthrough, or even a funny April's Fool that involved a user whose submission has been considered one of the worst submissions, if not the worst, of 1999 Portal. I seriously laughed my ass off reading both people's negative reactions and hate mail Tom got at that time.

Ofc that playlist I made is still in a slapdash state because it functions more like a general guide on how to get things right in terms of timeline evolution.

I will link to this News Post next time somebody talks about how they preferred the community as it was during "old Newgrounds"-days or how everything was better "back in the day..."

Those screenshots are like a time-capsule - FROM HELL! ;D

@Yatsufusa I second this! I am reading tons of old discussions in threads back in early 2000s especially in General (I will dare to read Politics too in future) and people ignore how vitriolic environment was at that time. No filters, I am glad to be in nowadays NG and this led me the future idea of making a blog about if I ever suggest NG as site to experience.

Newgrounds is... definitely unique. It's a site of iceberg upon iceberg. Recent developments and folks deleting their accounts makes me want to archive it over on internet archive, as well as my own HDDs obsessively. Very much my special interest.

That said, reading makes my head hurt, so I don't spend that long doing it per day!