Reviewers "trolled" by Yamauchi's damage test!

[-ku-]

scottie said:

For the 2nd time this week (and the second time in my life) I feel the need to defend IGN.

Reviewers CANNOT play games in their entirety. Well, some games they can - those that last about 6 hours. The majority of reviews are done to make money, which we cannot blame them for - everyone needs to eat. How long would you guess it would take to full experience every facet of GT5? It's just impractical to expect a reviewer to sink that much time into a game, especially when they need to get the review out as soon as they can, in order for it to actually be useful to anyone.

 

When reading reviews (and I do hope you read reviews in their entirity) you must always be aware that the reviewer did not play the game as much as you will over your  life.

I like Gamespots policy. If a game is huge we will at least try to finish the main sections of the game including story.

You can't rate COD without finishing story and progressing through the multiplayer at least to a significant level and as such I think it is quite imerative that IGN reviewers should have leveled up and completed the game significantly before rating a billion dollar franchise- 8.5/ dissapointment of 10'.

The only dissapointment is IGN, as they are hanging on shreds of credibility,,,, (if that)

I respect Gamespot and will respecet what ever score they give when they come to a conclusion, simply due to the fact that they have been in the review process of the game for quite some time now. (EVidence of which is on GS site)