That review just spat out "fake". They never mentioned anything we don't already know and it only mentioned game mechanics. I disagreed with so much in this I deem it an epic fail. I don't see how they could have all of the new stuff NV has in it and they call it a FO3 re hash.

It did seem like he overlooked a lot of the new features.THe only one he mention was hardcoe mode.

No no no. You got it all wrong. Game Informer isn't affiliated in any way with Gamestop. Gamestop is just trying to promote a very non-biased and very well known magazine. They do the same with Nintendo Power by having it on their shelves, but Nintendo Power is affiliated more with, well... Nintendo than it is Gamestop. Same applies for Game Informer.

If anything, Game Informer actually tends to have more honest and very well detailed reviews when compared to sites like IGN and Gamespot. Not to mention, they technically do two reviews of the same game in a little section off to the right of the review they call "Second Opinion." Said section is reviewed by a different critic, so there's more than one opinion instead of a big company conjuring up an opinion and one guy just writing it down.

If you really want the best review of the game, then you'll need to seek the public's opinion on said game. The closest we have to that is Metacritic, which is my other preferred review source for games.

i love game informer

Hate it, very biased in my opinion, they underate the psp and overate any game on the 360, oh and guys if you want to talk about gaming magazines, could you do it in the community section and not on the new vegas forums?

LOL I don't get why people are mad at this. Its one persons opinion (even if it is fake) Let them have there stupid reviews we'll be playing the game.

People are mad about this because this is the type of review that profits off others' misery through ad revenue.

I'm not mad because of his ignorance. I'm mad about the stupid pictures which say "liked" and etc.

I don't know about anyone else but my virus checker came back with a warning and has blocked the site of the review so I didn't even get to look at it.

now thats a good review

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Informer

Quote from Wikipedia:

lol what a tardus it sounds as if he watched a trailer at most the sperm

This review is a sham.

End of thread.

Wow I actually never knew that.(coulda guessed it, shoulda known, just never connected the dots) But still, the only hints that exist that indicate it is owned by GameStop in the mag itself are all the ads, and any possible Copyright/TM info.

Could you tell us what it said exactly? It's been deleted and we would very much appreciate it if you could post a few of the review's points or at least the score.

he did not give it a score, but he said it was considerably better then fallout 3.

This I did not know, but it says they were bought out in 2000 when the magazine started in 1991. So I'd say even though they are owned by Gamestop, their opinions aren't influenced by Gamestop, or at least not to a point where most of their reviews are complete garbage.

Bought out does not always equal controlled opinion.

All in all, I at least think they're much less biased than IGN or Gamespot, which is a big plus in my book.

i agree. i knew they were owned by gamestop but they seem to give pretty accurate reviews.

Yeah, I find they are pretty trustworthy. I trust Giant Bomb more than anyone else though, simply because of the circumstances regarding their creation. Being biased would be like breaking a commandant for them with their history.

Game Informer does destroy the hell out of some games in very vivid detail this month. Even some of the biggest names in game titles. Check out their "BBQ" article for scathing but accurate and true breakdowns of big name titles.

Seems like a poor review - in that the review itself is poor. Praises little change in good mechanics and then critisises it for the same. Seems like another "Shiny? Shiny? Not enough shiny" review.

i didnt get my copy today. maybe tomorrow i will get it

Hmm, ok. Maybe I've misjudged them. I tend to be mistrusting by nature. Maybe I'll check it out. Thanks.

GI was owned by an earlier chain of used game stores called Funcoland, which was later bought by GameStop. That said, the magaizne is editorially seperate from the company and they are also run as a seperate entity. From what I can tell, they are respected by other gaming journalists as well.

As for reviews, a major reviewer made a few comments on another board about New Vegas. He said the game was pretty huge and that even after about 25 hours of play he didn't feel like he'd seen that much of it. His two negatives were that the 360 version he was playing had locked up several times, though not since he'd cleared the cache on his system, and that the hardcoe mode wasn't as difficult as he'd hoped it would be.

Exactly as I thought.

And THAT sounds like a review that most of us were looking for. :tops:

And an interesting turn around as well between versions. Now, it seems like the PS3 version will be much better off than the Xbox 360 version because of its mandatory install wiping out said problem of locking up. And I expected that some people, especially those with experience with past Fallout 3 mods, would be a little disappointed in hardcoe mode.

It's funny how just two lines of text you posted are more credible than the wall of text posted in the supposed "review."

Oh. And I recently checked J.E. Sawyer's Twitter, and according to a tweet he got from a critic named Daniel Vavra, we can expect another positive review in the future. :fallout:

A couple of tweets from the critic in question.




http://twitter.com/DanielVavra
http://twitter.com/jesawyer

To clarify, the cache clearing has not stopped the lockups, but rather stopped a slowdown/memory leak(? that's what he surmised) problem he was having. The hard lockups have continued, with his estimate being 10 in about 25 hours of gameplay. Now that could be a hardware issue with his specific system, but he did say another reviewer he had talked to had also mentioned lockups. And this is on the retail 360 copy, not a reviewer version. He did think this was a big deal, to have lockups on a console title, but several other people said it seemed normal to them based on their experience with the 360 version of Fallout 3. In other words, it may just be a hold-over due to the game engine and not something specific to anything Obsidian has done.

I guess we'll know in a few short hours, though, if it's a widespread issue.