n.  Share this post  Link to post  Share on other sites  Reviews these days seem to be far more about how much the reviewer "likes" the game, and not about "how the game lives up to what it says it is".  What I'm saying is if a game is the best example of a first person shooter it should be regardless of what the theme is.  You talk as if there is some underlying objective truth to this, but what a game "says it is" or what makes something the "best example" of a type of game is a fundamentally subjective call.  Lock a bunch of games journalists in a room and I'd bet you can't even get them to agree on the two best first person shooters (purely from a mechanical standpoint, leaving aside issues of theme) much less on one.  And as for the former (what a game "says it is") we had reviewers treating The Beginner's Guide as if it were non-fiction ferchrissakes.  Share this post  Link to post  Share on other sites  You talk as if there is some underlying objective truth to this, but what a game "says it is" or what makes something the "best example" of a type of game is a fundamentally subjective call.  Lock a bunch of games journalists in a room and I'd bet you can't even get them to agree on the two best first person shooters (purely from a mechanical standpoint, leaving aside issues of theme) much less on one.  And as for the former (what a game "says it is") we had reviewers treating The Beginner's Guide as if it were non-fiction ferchrissakes.  