Some examples I can think of would be

Arthuros - Goddess
Druadan Forest - The Loremasters Time (not being pure dungeon synth ambient but with a lot of this element in the music)
Shogun's Castle - The Eight Noble Virtues of a Samurai
Chaucerian Myth - The Canterbury Tales
Thangorodrim - Taur-nu-Fuin

Some of them bore me and the ones that don't seem uncreative or original to me if I compare them with some of my favourite acts of this subgenre like Mistigo Varggoth Darkestra, Mortiis or Jim Kirkwood.

And wtf is with that "woof woof" thing?

Yo, whoever approved my Todd La Torre review, thank you. It's good to be back to reviewing metal.

But this is your only review on the site, or am I missing something here?

Yo man, been a while. I like your Undead review, good take.

It's the only one, yes. The other ones went away with my previous account. I wasn't all that attached to them either way, so no big loss, really. Gives me a chance to re-review some of that stuff with a better perspective.

https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/Entombed/Left_Hand_Path/796/Annable_Courts/324993

This will please those who think the album is overrated (it's not), but this is horribly written. Not only that, it's factually wrong. First off, it's HM2, not Metal Zone. And Entombed were very clearly influenced by grindcore.

Also, someone tell Xysma and Furbowl they no longer did death 'n' roll before Entombed. Annable said so.

The score is fine, the text is absolutely not fine. He doesn't describe WHY he gives it 73%, all his personal comments amount to one sentence where he complains about too much groove. Delete that shit and let someone competent try to describe why it's less than "completely fucking genre-defining and amazing", I'm sure we'd all benefit much more from it.

I hate to pile on Annable Courts since I know his reviews aren't exactly the most positively received around these parts, but really what is up with that Transilvanian Hunger write up? The randomly bolded sentences are there as ever, making the whole review an eyesore, and there are only a couple of real mentions of what the album sounds like, which I can actually kind of understand since Transilvanian Hunger is such a well-known album but still these mentions are extremely brief.

But by far the most glaring issue is that there is literally no opinion expressed there. He uses four paragraphs to say very little at all and just kinda slaps a score on that and that's it. Isn't the whole thing just completely pointless if you aren't actually telling me how you feel about an album?

lol someone directed me to this thread, I had no idea my little old reviews had sparked such a ruckus on the forum !

I've read the posts criticizing my reviews, but I'm writing this post with a specific purpose in mind. If you're among the ones that dislike my reviews, ask yourselves: have you disliked a review I wrote which general message you agreed with, or do you only dislike the reviews I wrote which you disagreed with and thought the %rating was too low ? If I wrote a positive review on, say, a Blut Aus Nord record and you liked that record too, but still thought the review sucked, then that's fine as well. That's all, just a simple question.

Inaccurate claims will piss some people off more than others. Like I earlier said: Death weren't the Megadeth of death metal. Dark Angel's Darkness Descends doesn't get into the grindcore territory. Master does not sound like early Sepultura...I could go on about this.

Snip

One more thing: we've seen plenty of reviewers like you in the past, and there's always a common theme: Little to no understanding or appreciation of metal history and evolution. I'm not saying you are required to like Left Hand Path, but it's pretty much impossible to give it 73% if you truly understand it for what it is. I think you'd be better off immersing yourself more deeply in the genre and watching some documentaries or something than continuing to humiliate yourself by poorly describing music you are not equipped to write about.

I don't completely agree with part this... Annabelle Creation's reviews are pretty bad for different reasons and not knowing history is only one factor, but personal enjoyment should always be the guiding light when you write a review.

You could be absolutely informed about a scene and still find a classic that doesn't resonate with you, and its in those cases that you have to show your skill as a writer and walk the thin line between showing that while you know your shit you don't find that album as enjoyable.
...Then after doing this hard work you will be shat upon by those who only read scores instead of reviews, but that's part of the job

do you only dislike the reviews I wrote which you disagreed with...

...these are likely to be equated with the heavy rock influence the band were harvesting at the time, with noticeable traces seeping through

There's almost never a reason to bold anything in a review for this site.

https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/Dark_Funeral/Vobiscum_Satanas/4048/Lich_Coldheart/316901

The fact that this person said *anything* positive about this album negates a 0. A 0 should have nothing positive, or the positives should be vastly outweighed by the negatives, as in a best-of compilation.

This review was just cringy to read. While, yes, VS isn't as good as the previous album, it still had its good moments. I think Lich was just hating on this album for the sake of it.

I don't have an issue with giving DF a low score, as long as it's well-written and thought out. That was not.