3.5/5 from GamePro

http://www.gamepro.com/article/reviews/218118/killzone-3/

However there are many issues with the review. For one, the reviewer calls SOCOM an FPS.

"I always overlook Killzone when I think about first-person shooters, even though I like it more than I like the other franchises I forget about, like F.E.A.R., Resistance, and SOCOM. "

Second, he really didn't even touch the multiplayer.

What about the multiplayer?

As is often the case with games reviewed before release, I didn't get to fully test out the multiplayer before writing my review. I did take into consideration the fact that it exists and that it adds value to the overall package when deciding on my score -- it didn't exactly move the needle, but it helped. There were review sessions set up for members of the press, but the sessions I sat in on weren't fully populated, so it didn't feel fair to use that experience for the purposes of reviewing the online modes.

How do you make a review about a game that has a heavy multiplayer component and only focus your entire review and score on it's single player?

I have not seen this done for any other FPS released this generation. 

My friends, this is why gaming journalism is laughed at. Nobody even takes the time to do a proper review, instead it is all about who can release theirs the fastest and get site hits.

I wish they would rather take the time and give their audience a proper review for a product they may or may not have interest in purchasing.

Such a disservice done to us all. This guy should get shit canned. He clearly shows he is full of shit in his opening paragraph as well as his closing paragraph.