What really annoyed me recently and really made me lose alot of respect for games journalism and reviewing on a whole was the release of Grand Theft Auto 4. I got my game 3 days before release on the Saturday(thanks to gameseek.co.uk) and so have had a good 4 days of playing it before writing this. My expectations were very high, almost too high as this is the first game i can ever remember seeing getting perfect reviews across the majority of gaming magazines including 2 that i subscribe to. I hadn't been looking forward to a game this much for a long time as i thought it must be a really special one. Usually the games i played alot and really enjoy that i thought were top games are only rated around 7-8/10 or 70-80% by reviewers and they always pick out minor flaws and faults as usual. Extremely innovative and original games get the same treatment as more 'mainstream' games that follow some over-used or cloned gameplay.

What really gets me is that i've waited so long to see what people thought of as a perfect game to come out and be available to me and if this is it im very disappointed. Dont get me wrong i dont hate GTA4 or think its a bad game, its fantastic, a great sequel that they have improved alot of stuff on. but thats it, a sequel really theres not a whole lot new here, just improvements so why does a game like this deserve to be considered to be so perfect and great. Ive encountered numerous bugs/unfair things in the game already so it has its flaws like so many of the games which i think deserved way better reviews.

Im really not sure what to expect from reviewers now, i already didnt take so much notice of the scores at the end of reviews and focused mainly on what the game was like and whether it would interest me but seeing a perfect score was supposed to mean something really really special.