a company often sends out review copies that are not all the way finished. and when they review the games the company then fixes some of the smaller problems

yeah they do play them.but the thing with reviewers is,if its not there sort of thing they wont enjoy it.its like a man reviewing a womans film.hes gonna review it bad .its like film critics out there giving action films youve enjoyed so much a 3 or a 4 because theres 2 much action in it.things like that.the problem is they give the games to the wrong people.

Yeah, I noticed all those things you pointed out just by playing the demo. Dunno why the reviewers are being tools.

Lost Odyssey was a victim of this as well. The technical issues in the review copies of that game were far worse than they were in the public version. Also, evidence showed that reviewers didn't even complete LO before reviewing it and the reviewer on Gamespy(the site thar gave LO a 2.5/5) admitted that he didn't know how to play the game properly on NeoGAF.

Yeah, the reviews for this game really bug me.

Especially the complaints that it's not enough of a Resident Evil game.

It'd be fine if RE4 got the same kind of criticism, but it didn't. RE4 received endless praise for it's new direction. This is what RE is now. Has been since 2005. Deal with it.

I'd say that this game is more Resident Evil than RE4 anyway, if only because it actually ties into the original storyline. That, and it's much scarier than RE4 (almost shit my pants while wading through those crocodile infested waters for the first time).

i think a lot of reviews are out with an agenda. to make the fanboys buy the other copy. i mean they ta;k abiut the inferior [s3 version but i dont notice the things half the time.

I think RE5 is an ok game but not near 40-50 pounds. i would get it for 30. thats the most i would pay

Hmmm, I've been wondering this for a while too. For example, GameSpot's Metroid Prime 3: Corruption made me laugh a lot. Hehe... I still can't believe it. Apparently, the reviewer couldn't find the ''Advanced'' control setting! I mean, it definitely showed that the reviewer at Gamespot was playing the game on the "Basic" sensitivity and it also showed that the guy didn't finish the game at all. I mean, he didn't even say anything about the ship's interactivity in the game, and they say they have a policy to not review a game unless the reviewer has completely finished its main storyline... Right!

But yeah, that's exactly why I think reviewers should review their policy a bit more, especially GameSpot. They wouldn't appear biased to me at least, and their reviews would seem to be a little bit more credible than they've been ever since that review (I still can't believe it).

Judging from your examples and a lot of stuff brought up in Mario Kart reviews, I'd say no, many reviewers don't pay much attention to the games they're writing a review of.

Good Q. Let me know when you get an answer.