I had a few reviews, but I deleted them to rewrite them and score them more accurately. To review, I want to calculate some game aspects to put the final score. I know what you're thinking: "Why don't you just edit them". I feel that editing them is risky, because a few people liked my reviews and I don't want to change it when they previously liked it, because I might change the score. I hope you enjoy my new upcoming reviews. Bye.

I wrote a blog that I simply didn't wanted it anymore, so here, it isn't anymore. Thanks for your understanding.

Nah, just kidding. I'm just here to talk about the unusual coincidence that happened. First, you GOT to know about the Half-Life 3 thing. If you don't, are living under a rock, buddy? However, my Half-Life 2 review was posted Sep 13, 2013 3:37. Do you notice the coincidence? There's a bunch of threes!!! Let me help you:

Sep 13 2013 3:37

Why is it a coincidence?

Half-Life fans, such as me, are asking for a sequel to the beloved HF2. However Valve, for some reasons, isn't releasing it yet. Not even a single official hint is given from them, only some rumors which is unsure if they're true or not. It's been a myth. However, we don't need to give up, because we believe that the legend will land on our planet. Yeah, that's my quote... maybe a bit cheesy, maybe even beautiful. Wait... What the hell am I... So, bye people and inform me if this coincidence is something special. Maybe i'm the savior that will bring this legend... Enough of this!

Come on, Rockstar. Why you keep delaying GTA V? You know I can't wait for that epic game? It is pushed to September 17. Just look at the fans reaction!

I know that It needs to take time to be a legendary game, but I can't wait. It's my most anticipated game of 2013.  

This is my reaction when I read my old reviews, which I deleted them:

Seriously, some of my old reviews suck. So, I'll give you an information. If you hate me because of the Grand Turismo 5's review which I deleted it, don't do it. I've played it only for 2 hours, and I did the review. See how stupid I was? I didn't knew how to make a review. Then, I realised what a big mistake I did. Not only the Grand Turismo 5's review was horrible, I had plenty of unneccessary and terrible written reviews. Sorry, guys, for that terrible mistake I made. :(

Battlefield 3 looks better on paper than Bad Company 2, but which is better in reality?

Gameplay:

Battlefield 3 (BF3) has a more open multiplayer gameplay than Bad Company 2 (BFBC2), and that's why in Battlefield 3 there's jets. However,  the map design in a few maps of BF3, is slightly dull. BFBC2 is known for having almost perfectly designed maps. Operation Metro of BF3 is, sometimes, nearly unplayable on PC, because the PC version is able to have 64 players in one match, however, on consoles, due to It's ability to only have 24 players, It is always possible to play in Operation Metro. BFBC 2 is more balanced than BF3. Battlefield 3 lacks UAV, a flying vehicle that appears in BFBC2. Lacking of UAV is slightly disappointing. When selecting where to spawn, in BF3, the display of your squad buddy is extra- blue-colored, that makes the multiplayer experience slightly unbalanced, because you can hardly see what's your squad buddy doing. Unable to clearly see what's your squad buddy doing can annoy some people for not understanding what's happening in your buddy's location. It's totally different in BFBC2. You can clearly see your squad buddy, because the display isn't extra-colored. The flying vehicles, in BF3, are difficult to control, espacially if a newbie is flying a vehicle, and It's unfair that It doesn't have a tutorial explaining how to fly a flying vehicle. The flying vehicles in BFBC2 are easy to control. The classes in BFBC2 are more balanced. and that makes the experience harder and more fun. Sniper can destroy vehicles by planting C4s on them. That's a perfect balance, because the players that uses the Sniper class are able to detect enemies way easier than other classes, by using the scope of the sniper. So, the players that use the Sniper class, can detect a tank and stealthy planting C4. However, in BF3 the C4s are in the Assault class, which is disappointing , because Assault players usually are in a open battle. While BFBC2 is more balanced, BF3 still has some new, great stuff. Costumizing a weapon is better, because player is able to add camouflage and more interesting additions. I love playing in a more open-world gameplay. Able to fly a jet is fun, able to drive a "water tank" is rewarding... 

Wins: Battlefield Bad Company 2

Engine: 

BF3's graphics are obviously better than BFBC2's, but the destruction is better in BFBC2. A building, in BFBC2, strategically will get destroyed by destroying it with explosives, that'll give you some unforgettable moments. Even BF3 has destructibillity, but It's downgraded. In BF3, most of the building are too high, that are impossible to be completely destroyed. That means that Frostbite 1.5 engine has a better destructibillity, but Frostbite 2 has better visuals. 

Wins: Battlefield Bad Company 2

It is my opinion that I prefer Bad Company 2 more than Battlefield 3. It is more balanced, more tactical, more strategic and, overall, more fun. Battlefield Bad Company 2 wins!