I'm reading through the comments and am completely baffled by what people are complaining about.
The only valid argument is that the game should have been given to a different reviewer to maintain consistency between this review and XIII's but even that is non-essential.
The rest of you are simply complaining that the game didn't get the score you feel it deserved. To which i say grow the F**k up and stop relying on publications to validate your own opinion. To those who argue that the review should be objective, that is the most nonsensical thing i've heard whilst being part of the VGC community. The only objective aspect of a review should be the outlining of the game mechanics, which in itself cannot make a review. A review needs critical evaluation, thus the reviewer needs to state how well they feel the mechanics work. If through your own past experiences, you feel you may enjoy a mechanic which was criticised (e.g combat), then use the objective sideof the review and an understanding of your own personal preferences to gauge that mechanic.
Anyway, what self proclaimed gamer relies on one review to guide their purchase??
