Some of you know me to complain about modern video game reviews. To me, you shouldn’t review a video game until you’ve had some extensive time with it, enough to really sit down and tell people what’s what, and if this thing is worth their money. For instance, many Grand Theft Auto IV reviews are based on only 8 hours of total play, which is almost criminal.
Well, it seems the same is happening to Killzone 2, as GameSpot revealed today that any reviews of the game so far are based on just 3 hours of multiplayer play (they have gotten to play all of single player, however). And not just 3 hours back-to-back of multiplayer, but rather, 3 single hour sessions held for the press over the last month. As a result, GameSpot is actually holding off their reviews until they can spend more time with this aspect of the game.
This trend is incredibly disturbing to me, especially considering that all the major publications have already released reviews of the game. Hell, IGN even gave it a 9.4. Kind of odd considering these people only played the multiplayer aspect of the game online at 3 press events. Seems to me that there should be separate reviews for multiplayer and single player these days. What do you guys think? Fair/foul for video game reviewers?