24th July 2003, 11:11 AM
(This post was last modified: 24th July 2003, 11:26 AM by A Black Falcon.)
Quote:In which case? This one?? Hmm, perhaps that's because the F-Zero GX reviews basically states "the game is the shining triumph of hard sushi, letting go never hurts".
Oh come on, you complain about low review scores CONSTANTLY.
Quote:But of course it does. /QUOTE]
Whatever...
[QUOTE]HA! So now you're slowly backing out of your argument, changing it because you're losing. Nice one.
Never said their F-Zero X review was great, just that its decent and good enough... and isn't a badly written review.
Quote:They don't usually quote intruction manuals like Gamespot does, and instead of just trying to smart by repeating useless information over and over, they cut to the chase. Usually.
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.
Quote:Oh yeah, I know what you mean! Oh wait, no I don't! And why is that? Because your statement is based off of a nonexistant review. Instead of quoting actual reviews like I do (it's great! You should try it sometime!), you make a vague comment about something that you made up. But of course, when you have nothing to back up your argument that is what you have to resort to. Genius arguing techniques, guys. I applaud you.
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/rayman...eview.html
http://pc.ign.com/articles/160/160732p1.html