I am avoiding all reviews because I want to form my own opinion on the game and not have any outside influence whatsoever.

I don't know when reviews will appear. And they do not matter to me at all.

Won't be looking at any of the reviews because:

1. Don't give a monkey's about they're "reviews", everyone has an opinion.

2. Don't trust ANY reviews.

3. Don't give a MONKEY's about reviews.

4. Don't like spoilers, going internet dark for a few days around release day.

Yes! This worries me as well. The steep spec requirements make me feel like they're either over-compensating for poor optimization, or the game really is a power house.

i lose all my fate on reviews after MGSV, every single one give the game a 10, when it doesnt deserve it, for a MGS game it have the worst story till date. So i will just play the game, i make my own impression on it.

Yeah, I'm not worried about Bethesda Softworks. They haven't let me down yet. Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Skyrim all ran great for me on PC at launch. New Vegas was a buggy mess that didn't work right for 2 weeks, but that was Obsidian. Daggerfall didn't run for me at launch, but that's because I was a computer noob and too dumb to know my PC didn't meet the requirements for it.

I hope it is the power house nature of their engine upgrade. They are using the same brand new lighting and material effects as Battlefront 3 and AC: Unity do.

Well, I think MGSV deserved a 10. The story was as bad as every MGS game to date, but the gameplay was 1000% better than any other MGS game. The last MGS game I cared about story-wise was the first MGS on PS1. I gave up from MGS2 onward. I'm one of the people that consider the MGS story as being so far up its own butt it's suffocated.

The only review that matters to me is mine. How I feel about the game is the most important thing to me, how someone else feels matters not. That being said, with a game I am unfamiliar with, I will read a review just to make sure it is not a broken game, but once I have figured out if it works, if I am interested, I buy it.

I have had the Pip Boy edition on Pre-Order since I could do the pre-order so reviews would not matter to my purchase decision anyway, even if I read them.

I will only reviews several months after playing the game, and I will inevitably get angry if they disagree with me. So no, they don't matter. Especially for a game I've been anticipating forever from a developer that has never let me down.

Snake Eater is the best MGS story-wise. It doesn't have the weird mind games of 2 and it's sorta like a James Bond movie, If you haven't already, give it a try.

Everything about it except the jungle setting is like a James Bond movie, from the (truly excellent) theme song to the girl to the overblown villains.

Reviews are all fine and well, but when you're a day one buyer like yours truly, they don't really hold much water, unless you are looking to compare your opinion to someone else's.

Or looking up a scathing review from some angry youtuber for entertainment value...

Those are previews of the game not reviews. Early copies of the game are usually not the same as the game that is released at launch, especially with Day 1 patches.

No, they are not. Video game companies do not send out copies to journalists to 'preview'. They only send out review copies; that's what they're called, and the things that those journalists then create are called 'reviews'. You may call them 'previews', but then you're distorting the term from its accepted meaning in journalism.

Video game previews are always tightly controlled by the publisher, and never allow the previewer to play through the entire game.

Here is the definition of preview

This is the accepted meaning in journalism. Previews are to give the public a taste of the game before it is released.

Here is the definition of a review copy.

Printed and bound copy of a book or other work sent out to reviewers after its official publication date. If sent before, it is called advance copy.

Just because some video game journalists are "reviewing" a game before its release, doesn't mean its a review. It just means that they are not using the proper term.

The way Bethesda is guarding the game like a hawk, wanting it to be as spoiler free as possible, it would not surprise me at all if it was review embargo'd untill launch.

I'm already sold on Fallout 4 anyway, and the written reviews are outdated for me anyway. I'll take youtube or twitch as a source for information, it gives me a far better impression of the gameplay and mechanic.