http://www.destructoid.com/review-littlebigplanet-2-191208.phtml

I read through the majority of the review, and other than his complaint about the physics (which I've heard other ppl say and I still don't understand the frustration) and some long load times, he didn't really seem to have many things he could list as negatives. In fact, he had a heck of a lot of positive things to say about it. He seemed to contradict himself slightly as well:

paragraph 4: "Rather than make any drastic overhauls, Media Molecule has opted instead for giving us the same experience with many more toys in the box"

paragraph 9: "LBP2 manages to impress with the sheer volume of additions."

He suggests elsewhere also that LBP 2 isn't much different from LBP 1. But if LBP2 added so much, then I don't understand how can he say this.

Anyways, I feel his review itself wasn't all that unfair or unreasonable on the whole, but I feel his 7.5/10 score is rather unjustified  in comparison to the review he wrote. I understand that everyone has different tastes and opinions, and I don't begin to think everyone needs to have the same one as me - it just feels like the small number of negatives he compiled didn't seem enough to back up a score that low, especially with all the strong positives he lists.

Anyways, I went through the whole review, but I did some skimming at times, so let me know if I missed some key negatives or any other key points he mentioned.

Do you guys feel 7.5/10 was justified?

i dont care about big review sites anymore they are the biggest fanboys alive and go where the money flows.

but what did he gave cod mw2 and cod black ops? quz those games are MOTS in a bad way.

also 7.5 againt almost all the other sites that gave 10..9.7   9.5 etc

Got popcorn?

I never read reviews anyway(exceptions : MAG, GT 5), besides that guy is famous for having weird opinions about games.

People shouldn't be too worried about such things, there are many sites that give low reviews just to get hits. Or to look different.

LBP 2 is standing at an amazing 92 at metacritic, and its not even a shooter.

Since when are people taking reviews seriously again?

JS reviewed MW2 and gave it a 9.5

Idk about BO. He only reviewed the PC version. The online was all buggy so he gave it a 6/10. I'm sure ps360 versions weren't buggy though

Another day, another person whining that Jim Sterling didn't give a game a perfect score.

The thing about Jim Sterling is that, more than most reviewers, he tries to use the full 1 to 10 range. So when he gives a game a 7.5 out of 10, he is not insulting it. He's saying that it was a good game, and recommends it.

About three quarters of his review was good stuff, and one quarter was the bad. Sounds to me like it was a fair review.

I don't see where there was any whining. And you say you think it's a fair review like I didn't say exactly that - I said I felt the review itself on the whole seemed fair and reasonable. But he listed lots of strong positives about the game while only a few negatives, so for that and other reasons, to me the score didn't seem to match the review.

I don't recall 1/4 of the entire review being about the bad. What were the other negatives he lists that took up that space? Like I said, I could have missed some stuff bc I skimmed at some parts.

Why would anyone expect anything else? The first game was innovative, exciting, new and a pretty good game on top of that. The second one cannot benefit from being innovative, it's not new anymore and some of the excitement would have worn off. It'd have to be an astronomical game to match the first because it doesn't benefit from it's newness anymore.

I LOVE Jim Sterling reviews, they may be brutally honest but they always cause a shit storm, what's amusing is, I don't think when Fable III got massacred by him any of the X360 crowd decided to make a thread about it, but when PS3 exclusive gets crucified.. *Shitstorm inbound*