Precisely. If MP3 gets a bad review, Sony fanboys are going to be all over it like white on rice. 

All i want is consistency here, if you think reviews don't matter you better not be in another thread bashing a game for getting bad reviews. I specifically remember more than 1 person say "i'm waiting for the ign review before i judge" so apparently it meants something to some people.

no flip-floppin people

I don't care about how long the game is. If I play it all the way through, and I had fun, I'll play it again. The game could be two hours long and if it was fun to play I'd play it all the time. Beating the game does not automatically make it old.

Hey, if I get it and beat it, and I don't feel like playing it again, I can always sell it and get maybe 15 or 20 bucks off a new game. I do that all the time, it's what I'm going to do with The Darkness. And what I did a long time ago with Rayman Raving Rabbids. But I doubt I'll be doing that with Heavenly Sword. If it didn't take longer to start the demo than to kill every enemy in it, I'd be playing it right now, it's fun as hell. Incidentally, the Folklore demo is the standard that demos should now be subjected to. That game rules too.

Uh, Games all cost the same.  Movies all cost the same.   Reviewers complain when games are to short or too long.  Reveiwers complain when movies are to shortor too long.  So... what are you talking about?

Story would be part of "Lasting Appeal" i imagine.  Reveiwers have complained about the story.  Also... not rating a game on length is lunacy.  If they released the Heavenly Sword Demo as the heavenly sword game would that deserve the same rating as the full game?

What people don't seem to have gotten (by not reading the reviews) the reviewers have both complained that it was...

 A. Not long enough .

B. Not varied enough. 

Not only is the game short.  But the enemies and battles repeat themselves too much because there isn't much enemy variety.  Is having 4-5 types of grunts really acceptable?  Isn't it an amazing sign that a game can get a 7 when it's considered both short and repetitive?

Length isn't an issue if the price is right or there's something that offers replayability. Heavenly Sword is $60 and offers almost no replayability.

As for your gameplay argument, gameplay is the reason we play games. If you want a beautiful story and that's it, go read a book or watch a movie. There are rare gems like FFVI that can still be a great game with horrible gameplay but those games are just rare. With a game like Heavenly Sword you aren't playing that game for any kind of rich narrative. The story is as dull and cliche as the characters and the only reason why you want to play that game is because it's fun to look at almost naked women kick a lot of ass by mashing buttons (and sorry to break it to you-- this is a button masher). A game like FFVI survived because it had a great story, perhaps the most amazing cast of characters ever, rich character development,  a legendary twist that games still copy over and over again, great direction, and brilliant music. On top of that, the game was long. If HS was near perfect to perfect on all of that perhaps it could be rated higher but the only other things it offers is pretty graphics and well done sound.

Button masher my ass. They kill you so bad if you're not careful.

If you can mash the X button and the game, it's a button masher. Take Kingdom Hearts 2, just because you can press [] and triangle in between X it is still a button masher. You don't HAVE to button mash to win the game, but it becomes necessary when you face multiple eniemies or bosses. HS is a button masher.

If HS got scores like Bioshock all the sony lovers would be using this to show how HS is the greatest thing ever, truly next gen, the wii is dead and PS3 will now begin it's domination of the holiday season. Buuuuut since it got less than stellar reviews, they don't matter it's still an awesome game, reviewers are idiots I never listen to them anyway, ect ect ect....