You're not a regular gamer you don't speak for anyone but people who are in the same sub-niche as yourself. You can't speak for the people who wouldn't even care to try this game.

you don't agree?  You don't want all kinds of games?  Just the popular ones? 

If I did troll report me and have me banned. Let's see if a mod considered i trolled.

How to put a negetive spin on something and not look like a fanboy, come out of the closet brother, TESTIFY!!!

You wouldn't say "I speak for all movie goers when I say The Lovely Bones is a great movie which everyone will enjoy" So the same ought to apply to a game like this which has a specific niche. You can't speak for all gamers when only a specific type of gamer would like this game. Im an a bit of an adventure game buff and I will certainly be playing it but I wouldn't speak for all gamers about it, its pretty arrogant to do so.

I speak for myself. You speak for yourself.

Neither of us speak for anyone else. Same goes for everyone else on this forum. This is regardless of which games we all choose to play.

We all speak our minds and those who wish to read them get to take those words as they wish.

Also take the time to browse my gaming collection. You will see that I am a gamer who enjoys tons of greatest hits titles as well as the niche. I guess than makes me just that much more of a "gamer" huh?

I will now explain to you why this is so and show that CGI is in fact correct even if he doesn't know why or can't explain why... 

I would like to preface that yes Sony is a business and they want to make as much money as possible. However as contradictory as it may seem, selling as many copies of a game as they can isn't necessarily the best strategy for which a console manufacturer can make money in the long run. Sony's strategy in it's game publishing is to create distinct experiences. They do this by supporting games that are unique and may not be huge sellers but that they will greatly resonate with a certain minority of the gamer world. If you add up all these different niche groups that Sony tries to resonate greatly with, you are left with the entire market that will have some sort of wanting desire for a Sony game.

Their belief is that if you make games that greatly resonate with smaller audiences then it will have a stronger pull with those gamers to buy the PS3 and be loyal to them. Thus in the long run those gamers will buy their third party games on Sony's system and not only will Sony make money but it will keep other developers happy as well. With each game that Sony releases they try to grab handfuls of each niche target market. This is so with games like MLB: The Show. That game will never sell more than what it's audience is limited to which is probably 1.5 million tops(or much lower). However Sony makes this game because they believe that there is a group of die hard baseball fans out there that will be greatly influenced by the presence of MLB: The Show and the likely hood of them buying a PS3 is much greater. The same theory is applied to Singstar. The game will never sell more than it's limited audience, but Sony feels that it will have a strong pull with that niche group of gamers(so strong that MS felt the need to make Lips). The same theory can be applied to Little Big Planet, MAG, Eye of Judgement, BUZZ!, Gran Turismo, Shadow of the Colosus, and many many other games that Sony publishes. 

This is different than the strategy that other consoles/publishers may apply which is to make games that can sell as much as possible. This may mean selling a lot more copies of a single game but because the game is intended for broader audiences certain compromises must be made and thus the game may not be distinct enough for it to have such a strong pull or absolute desire from it's purchasers. Therefore people may purchase the game in greater numbers but very few will desire the franchise so much that it will feel some sort of sense of loyalty to the game and/or publisher. One recent game that refused to make this commercial compromise that I could think of and thus has suffered with sales but has resonated greatly with it's smaller audience and thus their fans feel a strong loyalty or great desire for the game now, is Bayonetta. Unfortunately it's a third party title and their is no rub off effect that Sony gets when they publish such a title.

Obviously in the business world there are many other variables (such as price, technology, social influence, etc.) that effect the results of certain strategies but Sony does believe in there strategy. I'm not saying it's the best strategy, or the worst, it's just one strategy that they have chosen, and this allows them to create unique experiences and give their developers more freedom and create this passion from their userbase. That is probably the reason why Sony fanboys are so adamant about their system and why even at a higher price point there seems to be a strong demand for the console. 

Yer right, you wouldn't say that, and if it was similar to what you quoted I might care.  What he said is more like "I speak for all movie goers when I say that variety is good so that no matter your genre preference you can have great movies to watch" which is perfectly fine and logical to say.

Here, I have a better idea. Why not just come into a thread intrested about a game instead of arguing over spilled milk?

But that's the past now and simply food for thought...

Why is there an article explaining a game review? Why isn't the review enough of an article about the game? This seems weird to me. It's almost like he is defending the score for no reason at all.

Also, I am dubious as to why an outlet doing their own review would interview a third party about a separate review. I don't know; the whole thing just seems weird, or if I may be so bold, set-up.

I'll reserve my purchase decision after some more reviews and user feedback.