Both the PS3 and 360 versions have scored a 9.4 in IGN ....guess that Infinity Ward isnt incompetent EA(Tiburon) and know how to make a PS3 game .

 Ohh they explained it in a past interview - "we programmed it"

 Buying it tommorow morning.

buying this tomorrow night cant wait

now AC and mass effect, im broke!

hey wow, so it isn't a WW2 shooter!

interest level++

Meh, I was going to pick it up for PC until they said it had a 5 hour campaign. It really just bothers me how little time devs spend on single-player anymore. I'll probably pick it up when it hits budget price someday, but that's just too low of a value for me.

I agree with naznatips. Seems like an awesome game, but not at full price. I'll pick it up for PC in a year or two. I have plenty to keep me busy til then.

Oh man that review was horrible. Let me list just some of their complaints that I remember:

The game is 5 hours, the multiplayer has only 6 game modes and no vehicles, there is no CTF, the game has no cover system, only basic duck and move controls, and the game has awful AI.

Even with ALL that, they gave the game a 9.4. That bothers me. Scores should match the content of the review. Well, at least I know from all the complaints in the review that I don't want it now.

It seems a short campaign only matters when it is HS or other PS3 exclusive game ....Halo 3 and COD4 have quite short campaigns and dont get any point less for it .

Well, in their defense Halo 3 and CoD4 also have multiplayer which Heavenly Sword doesn't, but I agree that even multiplayer games should have at least 10 hours of single-player (Halo 3 does actually have 10 hours) unless they are fighters or have a whole lot of replayability. Personally, I look for at least 10 hours in my multi-player games and at least 15 hours in my single-player games. Again, there are exceptions, but that's my general standard.

 The idea is that multiplayer makes it all better. Which is bullshit if you're only there for the single-player to begin with.