I also hate misleading descriptions. Like, for example, a BASIC RPG. The description claims it's graphical but there are no screenshots. Sometimes, the only graphical thing in the game is the title screen. Some authors even claim a menu-based game as graphical intensive just as soon as it contains "Horizontal 0:Horizontal -62:Vertical 0:Vertical 94", even if everything else is word-based. Now, before downloading a game, I click the readme.txt and check the controls section (if any). If it says stuff like "press arrows to select menu choices" and nothing involves moving a playable character or map around, I don't download the zip file because I know it's a MUD-like game. There are a minority of text-only games that are good, though, like TI-City, for example (altough it is not finished), and Drug Wars.
At least, back when I still had a ticalc profile
, when I had an ASCII RPG, I said it was ASCII, I did not say it was graphical, even if the title screen was. I did not claim it ran pretty fast when it didn't ran that fast.
What I also don't like is when people put animated screenshots of their games that runs 10x faster than on a SE. It's false advertising.