I dunno, maybe GT5 and FF13 got a 8.5 and 8.9, but they meant dissapointing, not bad.

And if you believe they wanted hits, can you imagine if SMG2 was 1 on the list?

1.The development started in late 1990's for PS1. It did last 10 years, just on 3 other platforms on 3 diffrent gens.

2.So? Remedy needed more time because they wanted to make a game smaller with more limits, PD needed more time because they wanted to make a game bigger.

Apparently disappointment is governed far more by expectations, than execution.  I saw a number of good games there, but they disappoint.  It is due to expectations people have of the game.  The issue is far more expectations than the quality.  Gran Turismo 5 on anyone's disappointment list is due to bad expectation (bar set too high) than how good it is.  Another thing tending to lend towards disappointment is the belief that somehow long development times would result in something BOTH revolutionary and accessible.  I do see what happened with the likes of Alan Wake getting dinged on one of the pages.  And then you see Crackdown 2, which was merely a refining of the formula.  It did that, with its own glitches (got rid of it because of an issue with one of the Freak lairs resetting if you wandering what shouldn't of been too far away).  As far as Move and Kinect going, not sure what they were expecting.  Why wouldn't Move be like the Wii?  It does what the Wii does.  And for Kinect, not sure what people were expecting.  Anyone expecting Kinect to be a core gamer focused device?

So whose fault should that be? PD for failing to meet expectations or people for having too high an expectation?

I understand PD made promises but why are people so stupid to take at face value whatever they are told? Maybe that's why I'm rarely disappointed by games because I take whatever I'm told to expect then half it.

Surely it should be common knowledge by now that if a company promises you the world, you expect an Island, if they promise you an Island, you expect a patch of Grass. It's not just game companies, it's companies everywhere yet peeople can't seem to pick up the most basic thought process.

Destructoid (my favorite place to read reviews) gave it a 10/10 :D

Attention whores

Need For Speed: Hot Pursuit, another entry in EA's yearly racer catalog, has a higher metacritic than the oft-delayed yet highly polished Gran Turismo 5.

That is all.

yeah, and IGN gave a perfect 10 to GTA4, a game that is actually worse than GTA San Andreas and it does exactly what IGN complains about GT5: "not much new".  GTA4 is still the highest ranked videogame, perhaps is all history, and still there are counteless OWNERS that have openly expressed their dissapointment and call the game the most overrated of all time. GT5 is another GT game, but reviewers like to believe they are critics when they are not reviewing the new same Halo and the new same COD o GTA, and thus they were expecting something else, I really don't know how or why...

1. They were not working on Too Human straight through those ten years. The last I saw they put the development(from start to finish) of the Xbox version 3 years 

2. I'm saying they spent a couple years working on it as a open world then scrapped all that work and changed the game greatly. Instead of working on the same focus for five years 

What about Super Mario Galaxy 2?