I think we let a FB infiltrate the forums, quick, dispatch him before he blows the lid on ALL OF VGCHARTZ!!! omgshohmy hehe, jk

Oops, double post.

I wont ever trust ign anymore, what are they thinking? Giving the ps reviews to a 14 year old meaning reviews I trust only GT. They gave it a 6.0, also I played it at best buy, it started out good in controls A little wierd a warhawk is easier to drive. The sound was amazing and the graphics were off the hook!! Id give that first play a 7.6/10 but I cant give the whole game that since I didnt get to play the entire game.

Based on 21 reviews, Lair's got 57% average.
Source: gamerankings.com

Some of us here played it and came out with the same impressions noted in those reviews.

The same thing has been said in numerous threads and you can look up in PS3 sub-forum.

Okay, done. Move along.

Wait a second I never played Daikatana either, does that mean I cant say its a bad game? What about E.T. for the Atari?

The point of reviews is to tell people what games are bad so that they dont have to go through the anguish of playing rubbish games. Your attack on the impartiality of reviewers and your comments on the amount of time spent reviewing a game are also completely wrong. Large reviewers are either impartial or biased for their own reasons, not because they get payed off. Give me some proof that reviewers from any major magazine/site that isnt directly affiliated with a console company are told what to give games as far as scores go due to advertising and I will give this point some more credence. The '1 Hour' reviewing thing is complete BS, reviewers clock the game, how else can they possibly comment on its length.

Thinking reviews are based around average games being 7 isnt for 'some idiotic reason' its because it damned well IS, 6.5 to be exact. How did I get this figure? I took the median of ALL the game rankings on metacritic, which may I add is a huge sample.

rational decisions based on factual evidence
Factual evidence does not have to be personal experience, I have never personally tested the speed of light, that does not stop it being factual. An average of major reviews, such as metacritic or gamerankings, can be considered as factual evidence of how good a game is, or as close as you can get within such an opinionated subject as gaming.

actually seek to learn something true for ourselves that we make progress
There is a difference in accepting something is true without proof and accepting something is true WITH proof. There was no proof that the sun revolved around the earth (and at the time no proof that it was the otherway round), there is proof that this game is bad, it is called reviews.

Urgh, if reviewers say a game is bad, I will say the game is bad. This goes for everything from LAIR to Boogie to ET. I dont see why you thinking reviewers are wrong should have any impact on what I get to say, because like it or not they are what 99% of the gaming community goes by.

I've never played Superman64 either, but I'm also smart enough to know not to.

I don't bash Lair, I bash the people who hyped Lair ...

For about a year I have had the 'pleasure' of hearing people say things like "If a developer puts time into improving graphics they will obviously ensure that the gameplay works well" and "Lair is ensured to be an AAA title and will get higher reviews and outsell Metroid Prime 3."

If Lair wasn't overhyped it wouldn't be getting the negative attention that it is getting now.

Penny Arcade played it and said it sucked. You would have a tough time making the argument that they are biased. In fact I would say their brutal honesty is one of the main reasons they have become so popular.

Also the guy from Factor 5 said more or less, "it's not our fault it sucked" and "development was cursed". They don't give me confidence in the titles quality.

I very much agree the review system is far form perfect, particularly the focus on producing a number to review a game. I personally much prefer the concept of getting to know various reviewers tastes and identifying those like minded to you. Then when they recommend a game it is something you can rely on more than 8.75442 rating. Anyway I digress.

So yes the review system has its issues and there is bias, conflicts of interest and probably money changing hands. However, it is hardly worthless and when all reviews are taken in aggregate it is possible approximate a games quality. Especially if you are prepared to read a bunch of reviews.

Further more, who says we need to be 100% certain about everything we say. If I say Lair is bad, it goes without saying that I am not 100% certain of this. I am not saying I played the game completely unlocking every secret. I also was on the development team and know its every line of code. I also have played every game that is similar and thus am well equipped to compare it.

What I am saying is it is highly likely it is bad, but rather than speak like this:

If the bad reviews were in fact not overly biased, nor due to bribery or related to a conflict of interest, bearing in mind that I have not played it, it is highly likely that Lair is bad.

I just say it is bad, because it is a near to truth as we can get. So it is ridiculous to say you have to had played a game for a significant amount of time to say it is bad. There is enough evidence to give enough certainty to be able to make such statements.

 Not to nit-pick leo, but arn't you 15? I highly doubt that ign are giving review tasks to 14 year olds, but unless your implying that young teenagers are incapable of fairly playing, appreciating and understanding video games, im afraid i dont quite see your point?

I was a bit wary of the game since the reviews came out but I had to get it anyway because a friend went to America and there was no way of contacting her. After playing some of it, I think its a really fun game. I don't understand why the reviews are so bad. The controls are really easy and simple. Fighting with the dragon is fun whether your killing enemy dragons or eating enemy soldiers. The music is great too.