Ok, so I got Last Remnant for X360 a few weeks ago. I say it's excellent, and I can put up with alower than normal framerate (After all, I'm used to TRYING to play Oblivion on a 5 year old PC), as well as a couple of graphical glitches. Ok, fine, the X360 once really failed and spawned a boulder on top of the main character (no damage; just for visual effect), but that's only happened once. I can deal with that. Why, then, is that worth a whole 1.5 point drop? (6.5 X360, 8 PC) It's not as bad as Gamespot made it out to be. "Pop-in textures"? So what? You didn't complain about Gears of War 2 doing that. Which comes to something a little off topic, but it's still relevant. Why do you (Gamespot) complain about having to press a button to pick up weapons and ammo in Mercs 2 (Which wasn't a great game, but for the purpose of this point, run with it), but you said it was great for Gears of War 2?

Now, I'm not saying Gears of War 2 is a bad game. It's great! But I'm just finding this so annoyingly contradicting.

Back to "The Last Remnant", why are they complaining that the "Battle System can be obtuse"? You're playing the role of a commander of a battle for heck's sake! You don't have time to say "Hey, monsters, could you stop attacking for a minute? We have to plan out 25 soldiers' worth of orders before we run with it." As you can guess, this is just ridiculous. I could keep going, but I'm on a deadline here, so I'll wrap it up.

Anyway, in short, "What the 'Contradictory Reviews'"?

PS: Ace Combat 6 is made of win.

I just got an Xbox 360! The game I'm currently playing on it is Rainbow Six Vegas 2. It's an excellent game.

I just got Brawl! And it's awesome! (and it's also about time Australia got it.)

Well, I just got Mario Kart Wii. I've just finished writing a review on it, so if you want the rest of my complaints and praises, go there, I can't be bothered repeating it here. I just hope the Gamespot Community won't judge it too harshly. Anyway, that half of the time that I enjoy Mario Kart Wii is when I'm racing ghosts and playing online races. The times I regret getting it is when I'm doing any races that have the words bot, CPU, item, or bike in them. Generally, after losing a race because you got hit with 6 Blue Shells then a Red Shell, it sometimes makes you want to snap the controller. And I'm not just saying that *just* Blue Shells are evil, I'm saying that the now completely overpowered items now stop you from ever letting you win a race with pure skill anymore. Now you HAVE to have some luck as well. Unlike every other Mario Kart I've played. And then you have bikes... But I'm not going to repeat what I've already said. Big disappointment... but still quite fun, I must admit.

What never ceases to make me wonder, is why are there even "bad" retail games in existence. Do companies honestly hope to make money off an industry which can yield large profits IF you put in the effort, WITHOUT putting in the effort? Take Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing as an example. It is the lowest rated score on Gamespot at current (I believe, which also has some strange 10/10 User reviews... ANYWAY), and did they really think they could make money using it? I can understand creating games for practice, but putting it in retail anyway... I really don't see the point of it. And I get the feeling that this wasn't practice. And that's just one example. Does anyone have the same opinion as I do on this?