I liked it too...

First off, that is not an old saying. The bold is not even an opinion, but a statement denouncing those who seek to paint Devil's Third in worst light possible without even playing it, the ole Internet ban wagon. Why even bother with the sales and reviews part especially after the "its your opinion" blanket? Are they not just opinions as well? In just the current and previous generation, how many great games fall to the wayside because of unfairreviews and low Sales and vice versa. I remember during 6th gen the Atelier and .hack series averaged a 6 on "Professional" media outlets, but averaged 8' when reviewed by sites who are willing to look past it not being Final Fantasy X/12. 

Im definitely not going to convince you that Devil's Third is anything beyond decent, but its definitely not some hell spawn plaguing our industry with needless overbudgeted,unvideo game related garbage anc stuff like that. 

It's a fun game that needed a lot more time in development. It has a couple interesting ideas. The online is fun. Devil's Third to me feels like if Jean Claude Van Damme's stunt man went into acting and got a direct to VHS 1993 action movie. It's B grade it's silly but it's enjoyable for how B and dumb it is. The game controls fine. Some of the character models look decent and part of the game look unfinished. It's not a good game in reality but it's not Cheetamen or Superman 64. Devil's Third is a 20 dollar PS2 action game that came out a little late that needed more time in the cooker. Gotta remember this is a game that had 2 publishers and 3 engines and 1 start over (original concept was much different)

Eh, I dunno. I'd say 1998 qualifies as being reasonably old at this point. Regardless, I didn't say it was an old saying, so that's a moot point from the get go.

But yes, the bold is an opinion. "Devil's Third is nowhere near of a bad game that everyone wants it to be." Claiming that something is nowhere near as bad as everyone says it is/wants it to be is a subjective assessment of a game's quality. You're simply comparing it to a different standard; i.e. how bad it is commonly portrayed as. My point in citing reviews is simply to demonstrate that the game is widely viewed as one of the worst titles this generation by people who have played the game. 

If you want to argue that there's a bandwagon effect where other people disparrage the game simply because of what reviewers have said, then that is an objective claim, but that's different from definitively claiming that the game itself is nowhere near as bad as what people say/want it to be.

This is so amusing, I almost feel obligated to sign it. xD

Nah, I'm fine with single player campaign.

Sure, I will sign this.

Next time, don't buy crappy games when everybody tells you it's a crappy game.

You are not helping the market, Nintendo, or Nintendo's customers

I will buy and enjoy what I want. Glad to have the game and glad to be playing MUSHA right now as well. Games are cooool.

So it's like those mid tier AA games of the PS2 era people want back.

Yet when we get one, they whine it's the worst thing ever and avoid it.

I have the game, not yet played though, will go in with the lowest expectations possible, hopefully it's not a BS difficult game.