OXM reviews The Last Remnant

[ZenfoldorVGI]

@BMaker11

Here is what I'm talking about:

I would like to point out that despite you saying that if someone used this phrase, they were immediately "owned" before you even had to reply because it' so "predictable"....why don't you stop and think that it's predictable because, you know, IT'S TRUE!

You wrote that, and it's ignorant.

The reason it is ignorant, is because we only have 1 source for the review. Better than that, the only source we do have, has only given a numerical number.

We often hesitate to judge a game off a group of averaged numerical numbers accompanied by a plethora of text.

Saying unequovically that this game suckes, without any more evidence, is ignorant.

The game probably does suck, I don't care, it's beside the point.

The point is, your reasoning was ignorant here.

Even more hipocricital would be the fact that when Fable 2 came out, it got a good review from OXM, again, before other reviews were released. Those same fans claimed that OXM was biased, and untrustworthy, and they would wait for more reviews. Now those people claim that a numerical score of 7/10 from the magazine is unequivocal proof that the game sucks.

I don't know if it's lack of understand, or difference of ideology, but I think it's ignorant to claim a game sucks because, say, it didn't get 90/100 on metacritic. Much less, because it got a 7/10 from one review source, who didn't provide any text to back up the number, yet.

Now, do you understand? Am I wrong? Please answer me.