I can tell you this.

I have an official thread for 3D Dot Game Heroes and while it is nice to have that I can 100% assure you that so much gets lost in them because not everyone wants to frequently visit one thread to see every single post that is made within it.

How do I know this? Easy.

I posted the video called "The hero your hero could be", the 4th official trailer from Atlus. Nobody noticed this besides a couple of people that I personally PM'd about it. The following day I made a separate thread for it and then "BAM!", it was on the main page in the news section, then everyone else noticed.

So while it may be the "in thing" to make these Official Threads, in no way should they be the only place to find reviews, trailers, news, etc... because seeing how the last couple of days showed me, they aren't worth nearly as much as some people think.

Plus, at least alternate threads give us something to focus on and talk about. I honestly prefer it to be this way. I bore of seeing just 1 thread for each individual game. It gets really tiresome and really boring if you want me to be completely honest with you.

Wow...you're tricking quite a number of people into thinking this is a legitimate review. Poor guys.

WTF is this

While I still stand by what I wrote before, I must agree with you.

I just checked the link to the review and I can't believe that these are actually "Pros" that contribute to a 10/10 score.

Makes it seriously sound like the game was rated a 10/10 without the reviewer actually playing the game, which is preposterous.

A review based on trailer???

lol hilarious review

It's a legitimate review. As every review is from an opinion. Every review anyone can disagree on. Unless he didn't play the game, which anyone can lie, as people on IGN userreviews, rate games like final fantasy and halo, 10/10 or 0/0 weeks before the game comes out

However, Don't you think 86 different threads of Halo 3 review. Or 86 different threads of Pokemon, would be spammy?
yes

it would be legitimate if he actually played the game.

yeah, i edited that, I wrote too quickly. My mistake :P

No, it is a review based upon someone who happned to end up feeling the need to post a "First ALAN WAKE Review!" that happens to be good, and decided to post a thread out of it on here, rather than post it in the official Alan Wake thread, and hold up a score of the game as something awesomely sacred.  Based upon the response to this thread, apparently people don't read actual reviews.  They just go by a score and yell about how that must be a mark of something being awesome or suck.

And all I can do is go thhhhbpt... *sigh* at the sheer shallowness of the responses here.  But then, I did get some humor out of it, so I guess it made it worth it.  I would also suggest people end up knowing a site that reviews something, before commenting.  If you know Goes-to-11, you would understand what 10/10 means actually from that site.  Note the glowing review of Big Rigs on the site.

And no, I haven't even played the game, but hey, I certainly can put up a review, and be on the same plain as the first review site (gee, I wonder how long they actually played it) and also Pachter.  Hey, we are both on the Internet, right?

Anyhow, I happen to ruin any attempt to make a point by trying to explain the point I am making here.