So did they review Animal Crossing? Or The Sims?

Did I argue that it's not a game? I argued against this attack on EGM for something that is entirely their choice and since there is a 1up review.

Also I don't know what Everblue 2 is and I've never heard of it.

Also the only one here who is doing anything ban-worthy is you since you just verbally attacked me with references to a 'boot in the mouth' and a beating on the floor.

Also it's no secret that many Wii fans here view the game magazines/sites as anti Wii and/or anti Nintendo and it has been mentioned several times, especially with regards to EGM/1up as indicated by people predicting that Mario Galaxy would get bad EGM/1up scores simply because it was a Wii game.

 Yes, that seems to be exactly what they're doing.

 The nature of the videogaming market is changing, and rather than trying to broaden their appeal to embrace that change and take advantage of this opportunity, they've decided to cling desperately to their hardcore base by flipping potential new customers the finger. Go away, our magazine isn't for your kind.

 EGM is like a drowning man in a stormy sea who's too afraid he'll lose his grip on his life preserver to reach for the rope he's been tossed. We'll see how long that life preserver keeps him afloat.

Every day people do things that don't make sense. Some of those people are magazine editors. 

Wow, the editors of EGM have free will. We had no idea.

1up doing the review just makes EGM look that much more in the dark ages when they're running from and screaming about the "non-games" while 1up simply reviews the game, gives it a good score, and moves it.

I didn't think my post was that hard to understand.

It's the spiritual predecessor to Endless Ocean for the PS2. EGM reviews it, moves on. Endless Ocean comes along. "NONGAEM!!11" Insert rant about how all games should adhere to EGM's factually incorrect "rules," completely ignore the fact that they already reviewed its predecessor and didn't have a problem with the concept then.

I didn't say anything about bans, I just said that you weren't a mod anymore so you'll have to watch your back now when conjuring up tales of the Wii Army and how they ruin everything. Those attempts at diverting attention didn't save Hus or Killzone3.

The issue is that EGM wrote a shit piece about EO not being a game despite reviewing previous games not fitting their "criteria" for what is and isn't game. including the game's predecessor. Your issue is that people shouldn't say mean things about EGM because you like them and Nintendo fanboys don't.

I don't really see the correlation.

EGM are lame for being unprofessional. What is wrong with a game that has no danger and is easy.

Alot of people can't swim for example. So this kind of game to them can make them feel like they are somewhat there.

Not every game has to be about surviving danger. Who knows this game might encourage some people to go do some real diving.

Yes the game is unrealistic in some aspects but it's about enjoying yourself exploring in the ocean.

I for one will get this game one day. This will be the day after I get my pay check lol.

Whoa, I think some people here are reading WAY too much into this. Although I don't anymore, I used to read EGM regularly and they always have a section at the back called the "Reviews Wrap-up", as mentioned, where they write brief summaries of games that didn't arrive in time for completed reviews to beat deadlines or seemed otherwise pointless to critique (ie. Mary Kate & Ashley Sweet 16).

This is NOT a review. This is simply a little blurb, and is in fact more text than they usually provide for the games in this section. They may not have had time to play enough to do a proper review before they had to go to press, or they prioritized other titles that would have been more important to their main audience. They don't have the luxury of publishing whenever they want; they have to make deadlines and the process of printing and distribution automatically hampers the speed of their coverage compared to their online competitors.

If you've never read their magazine, this process might seem unfamiliar to you, but I assure you, it is completely normal in their publication; it is neither the first nor the last time a game that someone was hoping would be reviewed has been pushed aside for reasons either of time or of priority. Just randomly flipping through some back issues shows the same treatment shown to titles such as Romance of the Three Kingdoms X, Riviera, Yoshi Topsy-Turvy, and Goldeneye: Rogue Agent. And that's only mentioning a scant few.

@fkusumot:

Have you ever read an issue of EGM?

did they actually say the reason they did not rate rohue agent was cause they thought its not a game?