It will never cease to amaze me. The kind of glee that the denizens of the interwebs seem to mine out of the sorrow of others. Nearly every "news" blog out there that is reporting on the "scores" being submitted by reviewers is full of comments from people gloating about how bad a game is that they haven't played (Retail, or demo). Granted I haven't played the retail release as of this writing, but I *have* played through the demo several times, and I enjoyed the game I played. The fights that are occuring on message boards depress me for two reasons: people are fighting about games; and people are fighting about reviews. People out there are just fighting about the review, almost as if it were a retail product in and of itself.

This might just be my perception, but, I seem to notice more and more reviewers taking themselves far too seriously out there. I'm still a user at Gamespot, but there are a bunch of people there right now that think far too highly of their opinion and status; this is also true of IGN and 1UP. Tom McShea's review of Bionic Commando Rearmed is an excellent example to me. Grammatical and syntactical errors aside (for all you "straw-man" debaters out there. Grammar is *not* a basis for a good counter-arguement),  it becomes apparent in the review that he doesn't seem to understand what a remake is. By the end of the review he is essentially chastising players who enjoy the game as being neanderthals who are "... eager to set aside 20 years of design evolution..." for a "... game that still retains the same clever levels and novel swinging mechanics that made the original's charm endure through four console generations."  He can't seem to decide how he feels in this review. He seems to conclude that the game is fun, but is constantly harping on the fact that the design elements are old. It is almost as if he is going out of his way to make sure that we understand that Tom McShea really understands modern game design. By that rationale, Final Fantasy VII - X, in addition to almost *every* JRPG should be chastised for being ancient in terms of design. I guess it's just too bad that so many people just have a lot of fun playing them (not me... but look at the sales numbers for god's sake!).

To me the most useful thing a review can do--and the *only* thing I use them for--is to inform people if a product is functionally broken. I usually don't even read reviews anymore unless I have a concern about the technical execution of a game, though there are very few instances these days where that happens. It also happens more often these days, that I end up quite enjoying games that receive negative criticism. I really enjoyed The Club as an example. This doesn't make me a better or worse person, it just means that I had fun. The same is true of Too Human. I already know that I'm going to have fun playing this game. I just wish more people would make the *attempt* to approach things with an open mind instead of deciding they are going to hate it beforehand. They might *still* not like what they play... but at least they took the time to play it.