Famitsu sucks

[OB1]

Oh come on, you complain about low review scores CONSTANTLY.

Like when? If I complain about a score then I will also complain about the written review. The score is the summation of the written review, and is a good way to start with complaining or prasing a review.

ever said their F-Zero X review was great, just that its decent and good enough... and isn't a badly written review.

It is a very poorly-written review. The reviewer just complains about the graphics and simplifies the game to its very basic aspects without going into more depth. It is very obvious that the reviewer didn't spend much time on the game, or the review itself for that matter.

Gamespot just DOESN'T DO THAT!

IGN, however, often pads their reviews with lots of moronic fluff that doesn't belong anywhere near the review page.

YES. THEY. DO! Half of that F-Zero review at Gamespot is just talking about the controls and basic features of the game! The reviewer goes on and on about how the graphics suck and how he doesn't like the controls. That's it!

IGN usually covers everything that is needed to be covered in the review without spending too much time on useless instruction manual information like Gamespot does. They add some humor in their reviews (which is always a nice change of pace from Gamespot's terribly boring reviews), sometimes funny, sometimes not. But we've already established that you have no sense of humor.

There are far too many examples of both to make it effective to link.. its not like I'm commenting on some one or two reviews. This is about my overall impressions of each site's review styles and quality...

These two reviews are both okay. I just prefer Gamespot's style...

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/r...ape/review.html
http://pc.ign.com/articles/160/160732p1.html

Wow that... totally doesn't prove your point. You were agreeing with Nintendarse that their reviews consist of only two or three words, even though he was talking about Famitsu... which has absolutely nothing to do with your reply right there.

EGM reviews 7 years ago were just barely longer than that...

So you actually have EGM issues from seven years back? No? Well I do, and back then each review was four paragraphs long, one for each reviewer. They perfected the review format over the years, but there was nothing better than it back then.