One criticism I bring on myself is that in these two games action does not start for all pieces. There are a lot of pieces, many of them jumping over the pawn lines, and not all of them get developed before action starts. Some of the games end up practically with tactical achievement in early middle game. That's somewhat bad, in my opinion as I think outcome should be postponed until later. The good side, there is one, is that most endgames (the ones that are not rook and pawns :)) ) are unbalanced and have enough pawns to make them interesting, meaning pawns don't die that often until the endgame as many pieces just jump over them.
Criticism on my own games:
One criticism I bring on myself is that in these two games action does not start for all pieces. There are a lot of pieces, many of them jumping over the pawn lines, and not all of them get developed before action starts. Some of the games end up practically with tactical achievement in early middle game. That's somewhat bad, in my opinion as I think outcome should be postponed until later. The good side, there is one, is that most endgames (the ones that are not rook and pawns :)) ) are unbalanced and have enough pawns to make them interesting, meaning pawns don't die that often until the endgame as many pieces just jump over them.
What do you guys think on my thoughts?