EnricoPallazzo said:
You take a my words in a very literal way... I cant predict what 1000 reviewers will do. Still i got it right at 96. But now after reading them I believe the user score will be even lower. A dont even want to play the game anymore. |
You were very direct on reviewers not being allowed to give it less than 90 "because of progressism" and whatnot. And we didn't need 1000 reviewers to have it, in 80 reviews we had 3 70s, 1 85, 4 80s. So 10% of the critics gave it less than 90.
You are free to not play the game and I don't even care. But your reasoning was wrong and you are trying to back pedal on it.
You may not be able to predict 1000 reviewers, but funny enough I was able to predict that at least one reviewer would give less than 90.
Bonzinga said:
Its also not about GOW and GOT.. |
Sure isn't.

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."







