I disagree with the graphics being that bad but other than that i have no qualms. On a side note my dog just through up yellow stuff that reminds me of nectar.

@ fazz )

do you want a cookie now? ok here you go ...

Those look like spiders...

Wow, this game was supposed to be hot-boy. You know what I say to games that get ratings like this........................

HOT GAABAGE! Nope there is no R in that phrase.

I'm not saying it might not be fun for 1 day if I played it, but a 4.5? A 4.5? Thi sgame had mad hype and I thought it was supposed to be rated around 8ish. Another disappointing game.......chalk it up Pookie!

*Pookie writes on the board* Good job boy.

they're chocolate chips with legs

Let me take a second to break down his closing remarks:

4.5 for presentation because of a weak story. So the story of how a corporation basically mind controls soldiers to do their work, but one finally sees the "bad" that's going on, and switches sides to fight for a better cause, deserves a 4.5? Comparatively speaking, they gave Lair an 8.0 on presentation. Can I get a "wtf" right now?

4.0 for graphics. Seriously......a 4? I know these aren't Uncharted or Gears level graphics, but for real, a 4? Comparatively, Resistance (launch game) got an 8.0, ad even better GTAIV got a 10

5.0 for sound because "For one thing, the Mantel soldiers are presented as your stereotypical jarhead grunts that have no morality or sense of responsibility, killing people because they have always had a genuine bloodlust for death and destruction." kind of dialogue . Yet it's their addiction to the nectar (which consequently makes them do whatever Mantel wants them to) that makes them say and do those things. Comparatively, Army of Two got an 8.5 in this category, even though it had the cheesiest dialogue ever.

4.5 for gameplay. Because of weak AI, "gimmicks" (only nectar, so wtf) and a weak story. If that's the case, then Halo's gameplay should be a 4.5 too, cause the AI on both your side and the enemy side is RETARDED. Your own teammates can't drive a warthog to save their lives lol. The story for the Halo universe is "meh" at best (stop the Covenant from blowing up the Halo rings...3 times). Why didn't he talk about the mechanics in these comments? The game actually plays solid, but his complaint was that nectar makes it too easy.....well you switch sides rather early, so what's the complaint for? You don't use nectar for the entire game. Comparatively, Turok got a 7.0 for gameplay....seriously, what was that reviewer on?

Last, 4.5 for lasting appeal. He says the story won't draw you in for another run through? Well, isn't the "lasting appeal" for most FPSs, the multiplayer? Didn't he praise the multiplayer? So seriously, what's the deal? His score contradicts not only what he said, but the definition for the lasting appeal for shooters. Comparatively, once again, Turok got a 7.0 for lasting appeal, and that game was utter ass

Going through those comparisons, and having played the game myself, it only keeps adding to my belief that people want this game to fail.