I'm not insulting your reading skills, I'm criticizing your reading comprehension.  you have a nasty habit of making assumptions, accusations, and in some cases just making things up. 

I also want to know WHY you are so insistent on forcing me to play all difficulty modes.  My issue wasn't with the difficulty, my issue was with the games disconnect from its genre to its gameplay mechanics.  It doesn't matter what difficulty the game is on, those issues will still be there.  the weapon crafting is still easy as hell to abuse, the controls are, for an action game, still slow and sluggish, there's still so much in the way of ammo and health that you might as well have infinite both. It doesn't matter if you're on different modes or difficulties, those issues still persist.  Co Op, singleplayer, it doesn't matter.  it'll make the enemies harder or give you fewer crafting options or limit health and ammo drops, but you'll still be fighting against monsters that move too damn fast to properly eviscerate.  It's still a game where aiming in the general direction and hoping the enemy dies before you run out of ammo is about as deep as it gets.  

After having done this review, gotten a bunch of flack from people like you, and asking FANS of the game for clarification to ensure I didn't miss anything, I've only gotten stronger in my resolve that I'm not wrong.  My analysis of the game is that it messes up in key areas, excels in others, but is mostly mediocre.  therefore I give it a mediocre score.  I've said it before, I'll say it again:  you might be okay with shallow, porrly written games like this, but I am not.  I want depth.  I want originality.  I want fluidity.  I want a game with a well told story and deep characters. I want a game with tight controls.  I want a game that has enemies that are fun to kill.  I want a game where I feel awesome and badass and strong.  I want a game where above all else I'm having fun. 

When two thirds of my time in a game is dedicated to replaying some event becuase I got killed by something I didn't hear, or a hazard I didn't know was a hazard, or swearing at the game, or cursing at the bland, predictable plot twist, or getting frustrated at the enemies rather than the maddening glee that comes from sawing something in half in Gears of War, I'm not having a good time.  If I'm not having a good time, I can't in good conscience give it anything more than a 5.  When the only outstanding or otherwise good things about the game are a plot point thet can only be unlocked in a certain mode and a weapon crafting system that kinda destroys what made the original so good, I can't give it a good score. 

I did love the crafting system and Carver's madness, but I thought the graphics and art design were boring and uninspired. I felt the voice acting was okay, but nothing special.  the music and score were no better.  The controls were sluggish for an action game, the story was poorly told (though detailed if you watch the movies and read the books and take note of ALL the datalogs and audiologs in-game), and the disconnect between gameplay and story was way too wide to not facepalm every five minutes.  

Even my friend that played co op with me, who liked the game, cried foul just as often as I did.  My brother laughed, telling me it was hilarious to hear me yelling at the game for some stupid plot point or cheesy dialogue or cheap death.  

So tell me, based on that analysis, how is a 5 uncalled for?  Based on my experiences with the game, why in the world would I give this a 7 or an 8?  a 7 is a good game, an 8 is great.  This is not a great game.  It's a schizophrenic mess, as much as Carver's mind.  I can't claim it does very much well or even adequately.  it would be dishonest and terrible game review had I given it an 8.  

And no, my emotions are not what's driving me to give the game a 'harsh' score.  I enjoyed the first, but I'm not attached to it.  my criticisms come from a game design perspective as well as a writeer's perspective.  

I'm not insulting your reading skills, I'm criticizing your reading comprehension.  you have a nasty habit of making assumptions, accusations, and in some cases just making things up. 

I also want to know WHY you are so insistent on forcing me to play all difficulty modes.  My issue wasn't with the difficulty, my issue was with the games disconnect from its genre to its gameplay mechanics.  It doesn't matter what difficulty the game is on, those issues will still be there.  the weapon crafting is still easy as hell to abuse, the controls are, for an action game, still slow and sluggish, there's still so much in the way of ammo and health that you might as well have infinite both. It doesn't matter if you're on different modes or difficulties, those issues still persist.  Co Op, singleplayer, it doesn't matter.  it'll make the enemies harder or give you fewer crafting options or limit health and ammo drops, but you'll still be fighting against monsters that move too damn fast to properly eviscerate.  It's still a game where aiming in the general direction and hoping the enemy dies before you run out of ammo is about as deep as it gets.  

After having done this review, gotten a bunch of flack from people like you, and asking FANS of the game for clarification to ensure I didn't miss anything, I've only gotten stronger in my resolve that I'm not wrong.  My analysis of the game is that it messes up in key areas, excels in others, but is mostly mediocre.  therefore I give it a mediocre score.  I've said it before, I'll say it again:  you might be okay with shallow, porrly written games like this, but I am not.  I want depth.  I want originality.  I want fluidity.  I want a game with a well told story and deep characters. I want a game with tight controls.  I want a game that has enemies that are fun to kill.  I want a game where I feel awesome and badass and strong.  I want a game where above all else I'm having fun. 

When two thirds of my time in a game is dedicated to replaying some event becuase I got killed by something I didn't hear, or a hazard I didn't know was a hazard, or swearing at the game, or cursing at the bland, predictable plot twist, or getting frustrated at the enemies rather than the maddening glee that comes from sawing something in half in Gears of War, I'm not having a good time.  If I'm not having a good time, I can't in good conscience give it anything more than a 5.  When the only outstanding or otherwise good things about the game are a plot point thet can only be unlocked in a certain mode and a weapon crafting system that kinda destroys what made the original so good, I can't give it a good score. 

I did love the crafting system and Carver's madness, but I thought the graphics and art design were boring and uninspired. I felt the voice acting was okay, but nothing special.  the music and score were no better.  The controls were sluggish for an action game, the story was poorly told (though detailed if you watch the movies and read the books and take note of ALL the datalogs and audiologs in-game), and the disconnect between gameplay and story was way too wide to not facepalm every five minutes.  

Even my friend that played co op with me, who liked the game, cried foul just as often as I did.  My brother laughed, telling me it was hilarious to hear me yelling at the game for some stupid plot point or cheesy dialogue or cheap death.  

So tell me, based on that analysis, how is a 5 uncalled for?  Based on my experiences with the game, why in the world would I give this a 7 or an 8?  a 7 is a good game, an 8 is great.  This is not a great game.  It's a schizophrenic mess, as much as Carver's mind.  I can't claim it does very much well or even adequately.  it would be dishonest and terrible game review had I given it an 8.  

And no, my emotions are not what's driving me to give the game a 'harsh' score.  I enjoyed the first, but I'm not attached to it.  my criticisms come from a game design perspective as well as a writeer's perspective.