[quote name='psunami']I still maintain that IGN hardly played the game before they gave it that review. Some of the things that they talked about in the game were flat out wrong.
That paragraph pretty much sums up that he didn't play the game for long. Injuries and late hits are a major part of the game. If you don't injure players, you can't achieve certain objectives in the game. If you don't use late hits, you have a harder time filling up your meter, which allows you to pull off bigger plays.
You can give a game a low score, but when "I got bored" becomes your reason for marking down the game... it just seems to indicate that you didn't want to play it in the first place.
Other reviews have talked about the rubber-band AI, which can be true... but I would maintain that it can be overcome by injuring players on the other team, which IGN thought was too boring to bother with.
I really enjoyed the game. I got through the single player campaign in about a week, but I enjoyed it. Online was a lot of fun as well.[/quote]
IGNs reviews have been shit lately. Their reviewers always seem to have some strong underlying bias that's so pervasive that the review becomes either incredibly harsh or stupidly praising. Drivel either way as there are times when it's clear they didn't bother playing the entire game or understanding it.
This is a good sign that mediocre games will be dropping heavily during the holiday season. Target clearance, don't fail me now!
