Yep, I understand that.  I also tend to see Digital Foundry review threads on this site much more than any other reviewer (except for maybe posters who post their own reviews).  Why doesn't anyone make a thread from another review site?

I don't know of any that I actually like.  Apparently no one else can recommend one either.

I thought this post was a joke at first, but I see with the follow up post it wasn't

Any popular game review site that focuses on gameplay?

Um You realize 99% of game sites focus on gameplay, including much bigger ones than digital foundry, check out digital foundry's parent site eurogamer for example for reviews

I see Eurogamers not even the biggest in europe

https://www.similarweb.com/website/eurogamer.net/vs/ign.com/#traffic

https://www.similarweb.com/website/eurogamer.net/vs/gamespot.com/#traffic

Which of these sites do you prefer?  I have watched IGN reviews before, and I think they are pretty terrible.  They can point out a ton of flaws in a game and then still give it a 9/10.  As for other sites, most reviews that talk about gameplay still give a lot of weight to graphics.  On top of that, with most major sites, they always give high scores to games from a popular series even if its a game many fans don't care for like Skyward Sword or The Last of Us 2.  I would prefer a quality reviewer that is the exact opposite of Digital Foundry.  They give almost no weight to graphics and almost all of the weight to gameplay.  On top of that I would like a reviewer that can give a big title a low score if they actually think it is a bad entry.  

Which review sites do you personally like?

It seems like you don't quite get it.

Digital Foundry doesn't actually review games per se, they just analyse the technical aspects. What websites that actually review games are preferable to you doesn't have anything to do with Digital Foundry or this thread.

All of these sites have at least a few reviewers and the reviews are always only their reviewers opinion on the game.

I am going to say that you don't get it either.

Is what Digital Foundry says relevant or irrelevant?  I would say it's irrelevant, because graphics and technical aspects do not really tell me if I want to play a game or not.  On the other hand, you might say that it's relevant.  But then I would ask why no one makes a thread about a review from another youtube channel or website (other than the people who just give their own review)?  Why is it that you personally feel these Digital Foundry threads are more important than any other website's take on the game?

Also, I dare the next person replying to me to actually address the questions I'm asking instead of some copout reply like "You don't get it" or "here are some websites for you which I don't personally like".

Yes, it's very relevant, as this topic is about Digital Foundry's analysis of Mario Strikers Battle League. Everything you said beyond the first sentence of your first reply is off-topic and does not contribute to this discussion at all.

So you're just trying to hijack this topic to make it about which review sites you like, and we need to comply? Screw that, make your own topic if you're so eager to know.

FAIL.

Thanks for trying.

Some of us find technical stuff interesting. DF is for those who do.

I'm one of them, and for example I find it really fascinating seeing Next Level Games take their tech which already delivered one of the best looking games on Switch in Luigi's Mansion 3, and how it holds up in a 60fps title as opposed to a 30fps one.

If it's not for you that's fair enough, but can we please not derail the thread? The value of DF itself is a topic for another thread, this one is about the graphics performance of Mario Strikes Battle League.