I rarely disagree with Gamespot when it comes to reviews, but this one earning a 9 really surprises me. To each their own, but yeah. It was really not, not that good in my opinion. A 7 at best, and that's being generous.

I want it. Like, um, right now. Please?

Can we play it yet.

Tell me we can play it.

By "Mass Effect-y," do they mean they'll make the game really great then destroy it completely by writing a terrible ending? I understand.

By "push creative boundaries," do they mean find more ways to nefariously charge for unnecessary things and also how to ruin series? Sounds good.

He likes to run.

@Yamakoichi @radikel @big_stem How is holding your opinion a fact? Quit being so conceited when you're on a board meant for intelligent discussion.

And you are in the minority here in this specific discussion, that's the only fact you need to know.

I'm genuinely surprised they didn't charge for it.

@mrboone01 Actually, 4 didn't suck--both in sales and reception, it was quite successful. I even liked it.

The reasons 5 and 6 did was because Capcom did nothing to build off what made 4 exciting and new, and their stories got ridiculously worse fast. 4 wasn't traditionally survival-horror, I'll grant you, but what they did with it was fresh and still enjoyable. It was the same sort of situation with Dead Space: they made the third one marketable to idiot gamers who just want adrenaline fixes and not much horror, so it floundered.

@victorcom In the post I replied to, none of that was stated. You don't need the top-of-the-line anything to run the games out today, or will be out for a few years. Nothing wrong with a little smart thrifty shopping when building one's PC.

Also, your contention that PC sales are very poor, um. Many current studies would disagree with you on that. But to each their own.