Originally posted by BackFire
Really, I give the guy credit for not giving a game a high score just to appease fans if he doesn't actually feel it deserves it.
I think the difference here is that K&L isn't exactly doing great, review wise. Not terrible, but really not what was being keyed up for.
So unlike Zelda, where he seemed to be going against the grain almost for the hell of it, here he seems to be doing... what a lot of other people did too.
That's why the accusations of corporate bias have come out, because he was not the only guy trashing it, but he was the only guy trashing it on a site that had received such massive investment from the makers.
Still, Gamespot say that's not why, maybe it isn't- but they did pull the review. So one way or another, his review was not liked. I understand they've put an edited version back but.. you can see why people were suspicious.
I should probably see the review before commenting on it, I guess.
(Incidentally, I hate this recent obsession with playing morally ambiguous characters ("I don't play by anybody's rules... not even my own..."
and marketing this as somehow being cool or superior, so I am glad the game is getting junked)
(On the other hand... there should be more games with a decent co-op mechanic, so kudos to that bit)
