GI rates things based on how they're going to sell, how popular they think something is, or if they're getting paid. Well, except notable Wii games for some reason. But yeah, its scores for RDR and LP2 are the highest we've yet seen for either game.

dtewi said: *skips review* Gameinformer is a pile of shit, I don't care what they say.

I know right. 9.25 is such a low score.

Thats a pretty good review score. I can't believe the bitching in this thread over a 9.25. Lets remember that they actually played the game and you can't pass judgement on someone review if you haven't played the game yourself. I will say that the Lost Planet 2 score is way higher then what my score would be for the game but most of those seem in line for my particular taste/opinion.

big_boss said: Thats a pretty good review score. I can't believe the bitching in this thread over a 9.25. Lets remember that they actually played the game and you can't pass judgement on someone review if you haven't played the game yourself. I will say that the Lost Planet 2 score is way higher then what my score would be for the game but most of those seem in line for my particular taste/opinion.

Only one post in this thread bitched about SMG2's score specifically.  >_>

People in this thread need to chill out, stop letting their Nintendo love blind their judgement and accept the review's as they come. Jesus, Nintendo fan's are to IGN and Gameinformer what sony fan's are to Edge.

makingmusic476 said: big_boss said: Thats a pretty good review score. I can't believe the bitching in this thread over a 9.25. Lets remember that they actually played the game and you can't pass judgement on someone review if you haven't played the game yourself. I will say that the Lost Planet 2 score is way higher then what my score would be for the game but most of those seem in line for my particular taste/opinion. Only one post in this thread bitched about SMG2's score specifically.  >_>

Yeah well what I'm reading is GI sucks and its a double standard and GI's a pile of shit and reviewer will bash Nintendo for ect. What would you call that? Because I call that bitching.

big_boss said: makingmusic476 said: big_boss said: Thats a pretty good review score. I can't believe the bitching in this thread over a 9.25. Lets remember that they actually played the game and you can't pass judgement on someone review if you haven't played the game yourself. I will say that the Lost Planet 2 score is way higher then what my score would be for the game but most of those seem in line for my particular taste/opinion. Only one post in this thread bitched about SMG2's score specifically.  >_> Yeah well what I'm reading is GI sucks and its a double standard and GI's a pile of shit and reviewer will bash Nintendo for ect. What would you call that? Because I call that bitching.

Well, GI does suck.  :P

I gave up on them the month they gave Halo Wars a 9 (one of its highest scores) while giving Killzone 2 an 8 something (one of its lowest). 

This thread was merely an excuse to point out why Game Informer isn't that good, given their absurdly high score for LP2 and their questionably low score for MH3.  Only one person knocked GI specifically because of their SMG score.

makingmusic476 said: big_boss said: makingmusic476 said: big_boss said: Thats a pretty good review score. I can't believe the bitching in this thread over a 9.25. Lets remember that they actually played the game and you can't pass judgement on someone review if you haven't played the game yourself. I will say that the Lost Planet 2 score is way higher then what my score would be for the game but most of those seem in line for my particular taste/opinion. Only one post in this thread bitched about SMG2's score specifically.  >_> Yeah well what I'm reading is GI sucks and its a double standard and GI's a pile of shit and reviewer will bash Nintendo for ect. What would you call that? Because I call that bitching. Well, GI does suck.  :P I gave up on them the month they gave Halo Wars a 9 (one of its highest scores) while giving Killzone 2 an 8 something (one of its lowest).  This thread was merely an excuse to point out why Game Informer isn't that good, given their absurdly high score for LP2 and their questionably low score for MH3.  Only one person knocked GI specifically because of their SMG score.

They gave Killzone 2 a 8.75 which is what the game deserved giving an unbalanced multiplayer and a short and forgetful single player. At the same time its a different person reviewing each game so your going to have people who prefer one thing ( graphics ) over another ( gameplay). During the time LBP came out did we bitch about its absurdly high score? no, why? because everyone else was giving the game the same score. BTW GI weren't the only ones to give HM3 a 7, 1UP and edge gave it the same score. Now, if GI gave SMG2 a 10 and MH3 8.5 Wii fans would have bragged about the high scores and then talked about how much more respect they have for GI because they agree with the opinions of the reviewers. Thats what fanboys do, their hypocrites. Just because GI doesn't agree with you doesn't mean their "bad reviewers" it mean they have different taste in games.

big_boss said: Yeah well what I'm reading is GI sucks and its a double standard and GI's a pile of shit and reviewer will bash Nintendo for ect. What would you call that? Because I call that bitching.

People are bitching about GI sucking because it does. Notice the people saying the Lost Planet 2 review is way to high? Or questioning the Monster Hunter Tri review? The magazine is worthless garbage designed to sell you to advertisers. It is almost laughable to think there might be any journalistic integrity in any article in the thing.

I read that another one of GI's con's is that it's apparently too difficult.

So either nintendo games are too difficult or too easy. >_> I wish reviewers would stop playing Goldilocks.