My point still stands?endtherapture said:The Guardian: "Story-wise, Human Revolution is unimpeachable"Ragsnstitches said:I love the games, but whoever fed you this idea that it was some sort of amazing narrative experience was most certainly deluded.
Enjoying the story and praising it for being enjoyable, that's fine and a good basis for a review.
But...
Stating that it's "Unimpeachable" is just pure hyperbole. It reeks of someone having an incredibly poor pool of experience to draw that conclusion from. And that word should NEVER be used in review either. It's completely vapid without a standardised, objective metric to make that call on and that simply doesn't exist.
Lesson, I guess, is on you to filter the words that have no real meaning in the context of review. A breakdown of what works and doesn't work, based on opinion more often then not, is a review to take in since its closer to an objective breakdown. Expressions that are clearly pumped up by an emotional attachment shouldn't be taken quite so seriously. It spoils the experience for the reader, since they will go in expecting something similar to that deeply personal reaction the author had, and that just isn't possible (our experiences are our own, it can't be replicated). This is what results in "Hype" having a damaging affect on a person first reception, since they go in expecting one thing but receive something different and that doesn't jive for many.
To be honest, I thought you might have picked it up based on the crap people say on forums or by a friend who doesn't know how to moderate his emotional attachment. The fact that it's a reputable news source is kind of surprising and very disappointing.