Scenarios,

A)
1. Publishers not allowing reviews to say anything/certain bad things about the game
2. Consumers read review, thought it was good
3. Buy game and was surprised by the hidden "features"

B)
1. Publishers not allowing reviews below AAA (90+/100)
2. Consumers exicited over some AAA scores
3. Buy game and was disappointed, game didn't live up to the AAA status

Consequences,

Consumers distrust reviews and stopped buying games day 1. Sales fell across the board. "Casual" games continues to grow while the "hardcore" became skeptical and buy fewer games.

I see it as a long term vs short term gain. (The example above is long term in case I have to make it clear.)

Discuss.

This only applies to reviews before the games release. Solution....wait for reviews after release.

This is only for the reviewers that want to review the game 2 weeks before release.
After the game's release they can review it any way they want.
I consider it a fair trade. The reviewers sell their mags and the game publishers have a certain degree of control on the early image of the game.

It is happening sice Adam and Eve and that is why we, the gamers, are better off waiting for trusted review sources (whoever they are).

Yes. As stated in the "Consequences", we end up not buying games day1 because we can't trust reviews anymore. If you get burnt so many times, you'll learn not to trust early reviews again.

Let's face it. The so called "hardcore" gamers wanted the game day1, not 2 weeks later.

Assuming the practice of "limitations" keep up.

 I consider myself a hardcore gamer, therefore as a hardcore gamer, reviewers play almost no role in my decision making, demos, gameplay vids, and other info before reviews. 

I thought consumers learned not to buy games day 1 after releases such as E.T.