Not to argue someone else's opinions--only they can do that--there is a difference between frustrating and challenging, especially when it comes to game mechanics.  Also, I don't think Dark Souls and Luigi's Mansion are supposed to be played with the same purposes in mind.

I can't speak about the objective parts, but from reading the review, having to redo solved puzzles because you die really does deserve to have points subtracted, if it's true.  I hate when games make you do that.

Two women I know are actually pretty good at games. One of them is freaking hardcore at Uncharted 2 and 3 online. Kicking butts left and right.

Same here since there is so many opinions.  

As far as video reviews vs written reviews, how many sites actually do video reviews?  I can only think of a few.  Gametrailers, IGN, and gamespot.  And Carolynn Petit usually does a phenominal job at reviewing games with a lot of details. Not saying you said she did a bad job.

@everybody I reccomend the people who does not agree with this review to read or watch other reviews. If you guys don't like this review then fine, but there is no reason to attack her on a personal level.  She has had to deal with the same constant attacks since joining gamespot and it is immature guys.  No reason to attack her based off of her looks. 

Oh, I don't mean just for sites that also produce video reviews. I just think in general that the influence of Youtube, IGN, Gamespot, etc is being taken for granted when anyone is doing just strictly a written review now. If they make some strong/opinionated points, they should try to provide evidence about yours points in their own analysis so that it wouldn't difficult for someone reading their review that is not watching a video review to know where you are coming from. I understand what she's saying and describing. I don't know if it's a real problem or not based off of what she's written. I think most writers these days think that well most people are going to go on Youtube and check the game out anyway, so maybe their readers will just keep their thoughts in mind... then they think they don't have to be too terribly clear in why they feel this way or that, to form an objective description.

An example... you don't stop between each chapter of a book and watch a video of everything that just happened/was discussed. The writer should try to write it well enough to portray their own situation to you so that you can be in their shoes and relate to where they're coming from. I think that with a well written review, you can raise counter-points safely without having to necessarily worry you don't understand what they were trying to say... it doesn't make the review "bad", it's still an opinion, but it's just becoming less of a standard I think is all.

I cannot tell if it's really just her gaming style that is the issue or if she is talking about a game that was basically designed badly, makes things too ridiculous and is a case of self-defeating rather than just a high difficulty level.

A game like that that comes to mind is Defenders of Dynatron City. That game had virtually no hit detection half the time whether or not you were actually 'hitting' the enemies or not. I used to think I was just too poor at when I was playing very young, but I watched other views and read other people's opinions, and replayed in emulator... no, it was just bad game design.

The irony in this is that the 3DS Castlevania game had points taken off for NOT doing this.

However, I wouldn't be annoyed by having to redo solved puzzles because that way it discourages you from dying.  Isn't Dark Souls not much different, where if you die before you make it to the next level, you have to do everything over again?  I mean, you can try to say they aren't with the same purposes in mind, but that really isn't that good of a point because the game, from what I've read from multiple people, is supposed to have an element of challenge in it so putting that in there helps from making the game where you can die without any consequences.

No.  Two completely different things.  Having to fight your way through a level again is different than having to redo a puzzle you've already solved.  The first is part of the challenge, the second has no challenge, it's just an annoyance.  If you've solved it, then you've solved it.  It no longer has value.