| Boutros said: Let's get real here, it's not like he gave the game a 7/10. He gave it 4/10! He knew how people would react to that score. There was no objectivity at all in that review. I expect a lot more objectivity from a reviewer except the fun factor of course which can't really be objective. Personally, I learned not to trust reviews much nowadays but a lot of people do and if Destructoid was not on metacritic, no one would care about that review. Even Bioware directors said FFXIII was at the bottom of their list because they read some reviews and were not impressed with the game. I mean come on! We all know FFXIII is good enough if you like RPGs in general. Plus, when you read his review, I have a really hard time understanding how his arguments justifies the score. He's just whining and complaining about insignificant stuff. It's just trolling at it's best. He's not even the one who made the preview and the guy who made the preview loved the game so far. They just want hits. I think the facts speaks for themselves. I'll just ignore Sterling from now on. /rant |
I thought he was more objective than most other reviewers. He pointed out some major, crippling flaws with the game that most others just glossed over because "OMG look at those cutscenes!!"
"'Casual games' are something the 'Game Industry' invented to explain away the Wii success instead of actually listening or looking at what Nintendo did. There is no 'casual strategy' from Nintendo. 'Accessible strategy', yes, but ‘casual gamers’ is just the 'Game Industry''s polite way of saying what they feel: 'retarded gamers'."
-Sean Malstrom
