My opinion is that he is lying. He's welcome to prove my wrong.

People who don't like "playing games more than once" don't platinum games. And people who don't "like hard games" usually don't finish demon's souls. I'm allowed to use my intuition.

Sure. But is it really too much to ask for them to be transparant about it!?

Haha! Yeah it gets harder later on.

The reason is that this is the first game I ever fell asleep with WHILE playing.

It happened THREE times!

Those first 8-12 hours were terrible. But this is off topic.

@ Dr. Grass

Here is the proof that I have gotten the Platinum Trophy on the 27th of March 2012 (my birthday).

http://psnprofiles.com/trophies/475-Demons-Souls/AlphaChris

There are a lot of generalizations and stereotypes that you throw around, you know...

Demon's Soul was able to create a feeling of atmosphere in some levels... but your character was only an empty shell, there was almost no dialogue in the game and next to no story at all.

I don't really understand your obsession with difficulty level. Video Games are not only there for a challenge, they are also a means of entertainment, telling you fantastic stories or letting you do things that you can't do in reality. You can visit ancient Greece or Renaissance Italy, can travel through Space or use Magic.

If I read a book I simply enjoy the story. I am not trying to read it as fast as possible or with a really small font size just that it gets more difficult.

Games like Demon's Souls are simply made for gamer with your Attitude. I simply did not like this approach. Final Fantasy XIII is made for gamer with my approach who put more focus on storytelling. Tastes are different.

So although I have the skill to beat games on the highest difficulty level I get no satisfaction out of this. I simply do not care. I also do not care about competitive online multiplayer... Winning against a stranger on the internet is not something that gets me excited. I only care about if a game is entertaining or not.

Once in a physics examination, Nick finished the first question very soon, while his classmates were thinking it hard.The question was: When it thunders why do we see the lighting first, then hear the thunderrolls? Nick's answer: Because our eyes are before ears.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

diablo 3 gold
d3 gold

So for 1 thing, Kotaku for example do state how long they played and what they spent their time on AND generally the difficulty

I haven't played South Park, but the main criticism of the game is its RPG elements. I'm not hugely inclined to press forward and play an average RPG, then make it harder on myself

I generally don't think RPGs should really have difficulty levels, since in all proper RPGs you can get around it with grinding! Which is the reason I'm currently doing my Persona 4 G new game plus on easy, don't really want to grind

But in general difficulties can really change your opinion of the game. The Last of Us is so amazing because of the way that the gameplay makes you feel like you are a survivor scavenging for every little thing. But if you play on easy, you don't feel that terror and you don't feel the same way when you see Ellie and Joel terrified in cut-scenes

You can't just make such accusations and simply call them your opinion. For example, considering a game more fun on hard is an opinion. Calling someone "a fucking duchebag", isn't (this is an example, not what you said).  There are opinions and then there are insults.

Also, I hope this thread has helped you realize that unlike you, some of there rest of us don't like playing games on hard. I don't know if there are any statistics on this, but the general consensus is that most people don't play games on hard. Are they all trying not to have fun? What's fun for you is not fun for someone else. I beat the game in two days on normal, and believe it or not, I did not fall asleep. I would also give it a 9/10 despite not having played it on hard. Crazy, huh? 

"People who don't like "playing games more than once" don't platinum games"

I simply don't understand how you constantly think you can speak for everyone else. I don't like playing games more than once (I have a huge backlog of amazing games that I'd rather play) and still have 9 platinums. You can only speak for yourself, not others. 

They dont need to state we already know their reviews are insufficient to rush the videos/articles out.

Wich difficulty? Normal.
Completion rate? Just the regular game. No extras (possibly tried them and left them behind).

I have seen people say Lords of shadow 2 is a cakewalk... they obviously didnt complete those Kleidos challenges. That is why i dont trust reviews. They always omit important information.
Actually only one person on this website i saw post a review and was one of the few that noticed the real faults with the game: The auto-targeting and camera are seriously off. You wont notice that unless you are playing a challenge though. Otherwise you only notice it during some silly puzzles during the main quest.
The stealth section that everyone loves to hate and is understandable accounts for about 2% of the whole game. Its meaningless compared to the real issues of the game if you play it on a harder difficulty mode. The combat beeing frustrating because of technical issues at times i account as a more important flaw that none of the commercial reviewers could see. Hmmmmmmm... i wonder why...

xD

I definitely think reviewers should, like Kotaku, specify exactly how much of the game they played. Especially when so much content can be unrelated to the main story.

Look at how many levels are after the credits in Super Mario 3D World for example, and those are the better levels. Look at the K levels in Donkey Kong (I've only unlocked 2 and beaten 2), which require absolute platforming perfection and feature great design. Imagine reviewing Skyrim, but only rushing through the main quest and not touching smithing, enchanting or any of the optional mechanics.

I do think that the way the vast majority of reviewers work is wrong. And that's even before you consider how biased games journalists tend to be.

Agree. BTW there are games like the first three Thief (don't know much about the latest yet), in which gameplay changes considerably at the highest difficulty level, as  then you're very rarely allowed to kill armed human foes (let alone innocent bystanders or unarmed foes), and in some missions even being seen means a mission fail, I expect professional reviewers to know all this if they reviewed the game accurately as they claim, and I expect them to have played at least some missions with these highest settings to tell me meaningful things about the difference it makes.