@diglet... the blue box on the second page has a bit about online.

I don't suppose controls really need to be discussed when you can tailor them to your own liking.

Is it me or does the 7 look really wonky in the 76%?

Also, does ONM give lower than expected scores, similar to Nintendo Power. (NP gave Okami a 7.5).

Mike from Morgantown

This is my biggest peeve as of late. Why is this fake? The magazine is in the UK, so it's predictable that they use the european box art. Calling something fake without providing any valid evidence to back up your point is annoying and pointless.

Death animations... seriously? Who cares if they don't mention that.

Also, the blurb above the review score considers the multiplayer mode.

In their defense, this particular game has spawned a few legitamately fake reviews, so fans are probably just more warry than they normally would be.

Thats low, for peoples expectations

Same people that gave Red Steel 91%...

@Kyliedog.

About the second bit... Are you sure you aren't thinking of NOM rather than ONM?... as when it changed to Future Publishing and became ONM I doubt they said things like that.... entirely different team of writers for a start (although people seem to come and go anyway)

NOM always seemed childish, so I can imagine them calling Sony 'Fony'

Yep. Smells like another bomb to me.

It's low for my expectations, but until Metacritic has at least 4 scores it considers, I don't consider any score (good or bad) official.

Not that is a good standard to go by, but it's at least a minimum, especially from a source I don't normally consider on it's own. (IGN and maybe vgchartz (little too new to say 100% trust) seems generally reliable on their own. Most paper magazines I do not trust number scores, especially when they are out before the product, which generally means they probably didn't have the latest build.

Wasn't expecting greatness to begin with. 70-75% at the most. That's still good imo and I'm still getting it.