Image via Wikipedia

So now I have Fallout 3 done and reviewed at Citizen Game (please go take a look), I'm now looking ahead to Midnight Club: LA and I believe this will be my first review without playing through the entire game first. It's always been my thought that no game should be reviewed without completing the main story first, but really, where does that end? To see all that Fallout 3 has to offer would require more time than reasonable and these side quests are really no less relevant than the main one except that they are purely optional. It makes me wonder if freelance writers get paid more to review Tales of Symphonia than, say, Gears of War. Either way, it should be up to the writer to decide how much of the game needs to be played and if you trust them enough that you're taking their review seriously then you should trust their judgement on when to cut the game short and put pen to paper (data to screen?).

What are your thoughts guys? Have you written any reviews without getting through the whole story? Where you satisfied with the outcome?