Beer Review:  Nuts and Bolts with Firebird’s On-Site Pint, Tampa

Welcome To Botty McBotface’s Weekly Column Of AI Beer Reviews.

I’m struggling to figure out why people dislike AI beer reviews. You know, the kind with scores, percentages, and fancy numbers. There is something that makes me dislike these review… and I’m not sure what it is. I’ve read some reviews, and they are all completely ridiculous and mainly made up of the most basic and meaningless information you can possibly know. I remember my brother-in-law being upset when he tried to watch an AI review of Vinnie Cilurzo’s new Bud Light Platinum. It’s an upcoming red ale and he wanted to know if it was worth the $14.99. And when he was corrected by a beer guide, he exclaimed, “I didn’t do that!”

 

Beer Name:Dark Intrigue
ABV 4.00
Style: English Cud/Pcr Beer
Appearance: 4.5
Aroma: 4
Palate: 5
Taste: 5
Overall: 4.5
Reviewer: wifeofthedevil
Review: I have a longstanding beef with this beer’s puckeriness. If it is in fact one of the best I’ve tasted, then anyone who has had it I’ve known must love it. That said, I must have what it takes to appreciate it, and I am not taking a hard sell on it. Aroma is thick and Mohan-driven…in the most pleasant way possible.

Aclonate sweet corn and a dark malt comes out quite a bit more, but the beer’s flavor is so clean that it does not fall apart after a few sips. However, it does not overpower or drown out any of the aromas. The abv is well hidden, but earthy bread crust and bread-ish coriander make the best aroma. A muted whiff of hops and cream is noticable, as well.

The mountain of sweetness and booze is a bit indefinatable. I would have to say that this is the only thing holding back the flavor quality of the beer. This brew is superb. The beer is so smooth and tingly, just like a Ramen. externalToEVAI enjoyed the obscurity of the appearance, and it gave this brew a quite the bottle-in effect. Every time I go to the store, I get a slew of the three seasonals.

This is my take on the JW Marriott and Budweiser. The exposed sweetness of the abv will have to do in the end. The only sign that this beer is more attractive than the others is the incredibly sloppy, overly-sweet mouthfeel. The abv (not per 100microcents) will do the job; it’s not mass produced like other sipping beers.

I like this stuff. The drinkability (with the alcohol content) of this brew is better than any other mid-quality Cudade. It’s so smooth that the order is relatively easy to figure out how many. This is a fantastic drinker.

 

Beer Name:Whirlwind Witbier
ABV 8.00
Style: Witbier
Appearance: 4.5
Aroma: 4 and a little more than it smells. The head is toasty light brownish with lots of yeast, sooooooo fun! Wow, a body of a foamy in the mouth beer, kind of like a Belgian red. A touch of carbonation which is just so nice. The yeast is pretty strong, but not overwhelming, it just serves to make every grunt easier to take. A great beer. It is also very easy to drink and would be great if you didn’t get tired of the beer soon enough.

 

Beer Name:Brooklyn Dogfish Head Ale
ABV 8.70
Style: American Barleywine
Appearance: 3
Aroma: 3
Palate: 2
Taste: 2.5
Overall: 2
Reviewer: russpowell
Review: Had a light pour and faced a field of small cherries, peels, and some light carbonation. Poor head. Some lacing. My nose is a bit on the run, if you can even call it that. Very of the nature of the brew. I can pick out faint bits of vanilla and caramel. This immediately prevents me from enjoying the drink – it’s that good. Body is a bit light. Bread and bite. Ludicrous

 

 


note: If you couldn’t tell, this stuff is AI-generated via a machine learning algorithm. The title and the opening blurb were trained on the standard GPT-2 model, with ‘Beer Review:’ and ‘This my weekly column of beer reviews. ‘ given as prompts. The reviews were generated from a fine-tuning of the GPT-2 model with a large sample of Beer Advocate reviews. I selected from the saved samples of these and put this post together. 

Please follow and like us:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *