I have read 2 reviews, one from IGN (which i found first, so i took it not serious) and the other from Eurogamer. And IGN reviewer gave it an 6 calling it average content lacking and poorly executed while the Eurogamer called it Stylish and polished well executed shooter. This is hard to see where its going with IGN poor record of having so many "enrage the fanboys articles" i dont know where to turn. 

ign: http://au.xbox360.ign.com/articles/116/1166987p1.html

Eurogamer: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-05-10-brink-review?page=2

ones thing for sure is that its an no buy for me, 8 maps! and an single player campaign which is just playing those maps with bots with some intro cutscenes is very dissapointing. I am starting to lose hope in Modern shooters now that Brink has failed. While the last 3 shooters i have failed all have been dissapointments (moh, Socom4 and now Brink) i dont want to get interested in BF3 anymore. 

This article should shed some light on the situation http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/05/why-were-not-review-brink-and-why-you-shouldnt-buy-it-yet.ars

bollocks reviews imo

the game is made for online so it should be revieved as such, i think it looks pretty good

So basically, it's been about five years since this generation started and reviewers still don't know how to write a review for an online multiplayer game. Most of these reviews are ragging on the bots and the 'campaign', when they should be primarily focused on the online portion of the game (which is all of it).

I have no interest in Brink, but I do enjoy reading reviews and some of the ones that have come out have been atrocious, it's basically getting the MAG, Shadowrun, Warhawk treatment of 'if it doesn't have a campaign, then it sucks and doesn't deserve a full price'. 

Once again, the light will be shed and it will become really easy to tell which reviewer is actually good at doing what they do and which reviewer plays games as a weekend hobby and only got the job because their professional writing course couldn't land them into a better field of work. Eurogamer and IGN have already proven that they are among best at what they do and Joystiq have proven that I need to stay the fuck away from Joystiq (1UP has always been horrible and are irrelevant).

Brink should do fine sales wise, if Homefront and Medal of Honour have taught us anything, it's that online gamers don't care about reviews and are willing to jump from game to game.

If Homefront and Medal of Honour have taught us anything, it's that advertising sells games 

Reviewers are used to trying an online multiplayer for an hour or 2 and then rating it.

who wants to pay full price for a online game with a horrible campaign what a waste of money this game deserves a 2/10

People aren't going to buy games they don't need and Brink is doing alright on the marketing front, it should still do decently despite the reviews.

I expected these scores. Brink doesn't seem to be any thing special. 

reviewers dont know how to review mp games. so they should stop doing it.