14 DAY TRIAL // Whenever I'm writing a review I usually have at least 3 to 5 hours of gameplay on my account before starting to discuss the flaws and strong points of a title. Well, there are a couple of magazines and sites out there that would do anything for the exclusivity, so they'll write only "first reviews" only by watching YouTube gameplay vids and playing a game's demo.
This also happened with the review of the Super Mario Galaxy title, featured in "Gunk", a Belgian magazine. One of Nintendo's spokesman guaranteed that "it is 100 percent not a review", considered that no one was allowed to get his/her hands on the final version of the game, not till October 10. So what did those guys review, then? It might be the game's demo, available at E3, but since we're dealing with one of the best upcoming Wii titles, it's a real shame that some people would misinform gamers like that.
Super Mario Galaxy scored a 92 out of 100 in the one-page "exclusive" review... This grade is not realistic, although the game may be a hit, but unless you try all of its modes and check out its features, there's no telling where a major flaw and bug can pop up ruining everything. This was the first time I heard about a gaming magazine being caught red-handed like that and many other sites should start worrying right now, since all their exclusive reviews are nothing more than hoaxes.
It's sad that in the era of Internet demo downloads, game shops and hardcore gaming, some people will only do with watching YouTube clips instead of playing certain titles. How long would you play a game before finally being able to write about it in a coherent, original and logical manner?