PullusPardus said:
Kantor said:
PullusPardus said:
its not they are "Too lazy" , jeez.
its that Gamespot doesn't review a game before getting the final build. IGN reviews the review build, IGN is pretty stupid at times, reviewed by a bunch of idiots, and if their fanbase loves a game, they give it an extra score, if the game is not so popular they just rub it off, if the game is too hard to finish they whine about the difficulty and review it before finishing it.
Gamespot however take good notes on what the game offers and what to keep an eye out, their scores however are not the most generous but thats a good thing since it means they are not biased.
so Gamespot. |
Okay. Please explain why:
1) They didn't review Valkyria Chronicles until 3 weeks after release
2) The PS3 review of Dead Space was put up a week after the 360 review, and was IDENTICAL.
3) Similarly, Dragon Ball Burst Limit had no PS3 review until WAY after the 360 review.
I don't know why they do it, but they do it.
|
1) its an rpg, VC takes long to finish.
2) different team, reviewing on different consoles
3) same as above
|
1) 3 weeks? For somebody whose job it is to play videogames and write about them? 21 days? And then gave it 8.5.
2) With the same review.
3) Same as above.
Not to mention a few horrible, horrible things they have done:
1) Tools of Destruction 7.5. Most monumental fail of any reviewer ever.
2) Assassin's Creed 9. I was actually excited for it. Fortunately, I never got around to buying it, and only borrowed and finished it. Oh god...
3) The Kane and Lynch debacle- WHAT? Eidos gives us advertising money, Jeff! You can't give their game a 6.5! You are so fired, and we're editing your review to boot.
There are others, but those were three that stuck in my mind.
(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective 
