There has been a lot of controversy within the last few months surrounding the low review scores given by Gamespot to games like Kane and Lynch, Too Human and more recently Mercenaries 2. The situation has gotten to the point where members our the community have gone so far as to state that certain reviewers should be "fired" for giving scores that they do not agree with. They have even been vicious open web attacks by people who as far as I am concerned are just looking to make a biger name for themselves and should know better since they are attacking their peers.

Let me start by saying that I do not believe that any reviewer should be fired for giving a game a score that is considered "too low" or "too high". Gamespot's reviewers follow a set of criteria which breakdown to a final score, but at the end of the day it all boils down to the opinion of the person reviewing the game. So in the defence of the Gamespot's reviewers all I can say is that they are doing the job that love and are paid to do. They are gamers who are lucky enough to have made it their profession.

It is left up to the consumers to read as may reviews and watch game play movie samples as they can find across the web before they decide to buy a game, whether it was given a bad review or not.

My biggest concern when deciding if I should buy any game is the number of technical issues that has been reported about it and the length of the average playing time. I will not spend good money on a game that is technically unsound or a game that only l 100% complete in less than 15 hours. Gamespot reviews are excellent for getting that kind of information and I will continue to use them for that purpose.