Holy shit, the storm of controversy would be so epic that I wish it would happen.

Giving a game a mediocre score because he didn't like the story and style of a game? How dare he!

That would make the forums quite entertaining!

Gears of War series is not known for its story telling and character development. Gears of War series delivers towards its young target audience young male gamers. Like every game it is not for everyone.

I honestly thought Gears 3 was going to be a major contender for Game of the Year awards this season.  It may still be, but with a metacritic of 91, when Portal 2 has a 95, I honestly don't know what to think.

Yea, sums up my feelings, as well.

People need to stop with the "this game cost a lot to make and is one of the flagships of my console of choice, so it MUST get a 9 or above or we must strike out against the site who posted the review" crap.  Or worse, the "a 7 or a 8 are now to be considered equal to 4s and 5s" shit.

reviewing the third game in a trilogy does seem to be a challenge for some reviewers. They seem to be caught between reviewing the game they are playing vs. the previous game they played. MSN's reviewer seems to get confused about what he is playing, similar to a movie critic who reviews a summer blockbuster against an academy award movie (you simply need to use different criteria).

Gears is a summer blockbuster...it's dialogue is perfect for that style, it's not immature or silly, it's the right dialogue for this game. Also many reviewers are confused about how to properly compare the next game in a series vs. the last. If a reviewer finds themselves saying I've been there and done that, they are using the wrong criteria. The easiest way to review the game is to ask..."is it better than the last one". So far with gears 3 that has been an undeniable yes...so a good reviewer would take the score they gave to gears 2 and go up from there. But unfortunately game reviewers aren't that practical and they do have to add controversy into their reviews to help generate hits for their sites. In the end they all say the same thing Gears 3 is better than the past two and that is the only part of the review that actually matters.

Wha...?

This is like Nintendo Power giving Skyward Sword a 7/10. It's just unfathomable.

Reviewers are not meant to review a game based on how much they like it. That is the trap that this idiot, and pretty much every other game reviewer falls into. A review should be written with the target audience of the game in mind. A gears 3 review should be written with the premise that we liked gears 2.

The reviewer admits that it deserves an 8-9/10---"it's a grandiose, action-packed, pulse-pounding science-fiction shooter of the first degree that satisfies just about every itch one could have from the genre. Other reviewers are sure to rate it an eight or nine out of 10 for these reasons."

But then he lowers the rating to 7 because he personally doesn't like that sort of game.

There is no denying, this man should never be allowed to review games again.

Lmao