I did not like this article at all. It was all old, re-hashed information. Also, whoever wrote it tried to spice it up by adding in some of the worst jokes I've ever heard.
I agree. Poor article. With the notable exception of the introduction on background history, it read like the author had in a rush gone through all the previous ones posted in competitor magazines and made a quick quasi-publishable mish mash out of them, just so PC Gamer would not look as bad as the total absence of Skyrim coverage would surely guarantee. Contrast this with the great feature Gameinformer did, which,evidently, while kept in a straitjacket so not to overspill too much information, managed to be informative, insightful and entertaining.
PC gamer article tasted like reheated canned beans.