Well then in that case, I will not bother reading a review since its all BS.  Not like I ever read any reviews in the first place. There is a difference between preview and review, and I think some people are getting it mixed up.

LOL yeh I saw the level 40 damage where parts of cars are getting detact.

Too bad reviewers just sits and plays it for like an hour then makes a conclusion, If thats all reviewers do its no better than an average joe going into bestbuy plays GT5 in the boot for 30min and say its crap.

This is their job. They are supposed to play the game in it's entirity THEN give a review on it. You can't expect to go into a full day (8 hours) of work and decide to leave halfway because you "need to eat". And beating the game/playing it extensively will always give a better representation of the game than playing "about 6 hours" of the game. This is why I believe reviews shouldn't be published until 1 week after a game is released.

1. If they can't do it, then they shouldn't be in this business. Not all games demand the same time to review them, but some do come along that requires it

2. A quick half assed review won't help consumers as well. What if someone wants to buy this game next year, they come into read the review and the half assed info give them an inaccurate impression? So no don't kid yourself, they are doing it so they can get hits, not to help readers. Your forgetting about the game comments is silly, if that was the case games with strong legs won't exist. IF the game is good there will always be people to buy them, especially future owners

3. If they don't have time they should have done what Gamespot did. give a work in progress review to give early impressions and let readers know a detailed review is on the way. And maybe just maybe, users are pointing out that reviews like IGn do not talk about all the important aspects of a game? I for one don't care about the score, for example iirc Justpushstart gave a good review score to GT but the content of that review was pure garbage simple as that. So that's what these comments show, it's not a conspiracy of fans hating reviews cuz of the score, 'fans' don't care about such silly things they will get the game eitherway

4. IGN is a business, so is Nestle. Just because they have to focus on profit doesn't mean they should sacrifice quality of their products or services. Profit is just one priority, so is customer satisfaction and quality products/services (in this case reviews)

This! IGN has become a joke. They opted to have an early review to get more hits instead of acting professional and playing the game a few more days. I mean those people get paid to play games and write reviews. Even many users on VGC say that they think the game is great (9.2 for example), but also mention that they've only played x hours, so they don't know whether that will change at some point. I think one should review every single feauture of a game, such as trophies (if they are stupid or extremely difficult), 3d and head tracking (in the case of GT5), since, although the gameplay is the most important part, many gamers care about these extras. I haven't read the review, so I've no idea if they mention them. How much time did they play online?

Anyone notice that GameTrailers have yet to give their review?

I like that, gives you a reason to keep playing beyond unlocking more cars. Great for gameplay, probably not so great for reviews coming from lazy bums with agendas.

No , reviewers have to play the game fully to review it, thats why Gamespot take a lot of time to review the games,and thats why they haven't reviewed GT5 yet, Gamespot are Professional , unlike IGN.

If its your full time job reviewing games, you have all the time you need to really test the game and properly judge its mettle. If I were a mechanic, I couldn't simply stop repairing a car after an 8 hour shift and leave it like that, I would continue the day after, its my damn job.

Yamauchi is king; confirmed.

because they're still playing it, read my other reply.