By popular demand, I beat Metroid Other M this weekend. Did completing the game change my “meh” opinion? No.
As rated in my original review, Metroid: Other M is an average game at best, made worse by limiting controls and a pathetic story. As a result, I believe Other M will go down as a top contender for “weakest Metroid ever.”
That said, I did learn some things from “Metroidgate.” They are as follows:
- I should have disclosed that my review was based on an incomplete play through. Although Infendo doesn’t require the completion of a game before recommending it to our readers, this would have been helpful for our most ardent readers.
- I should have mentioned that you can “sense dodge” while in third person mode by tapping the D pad, but the truth is, it doesn’t work well enough to change my opinion that you are a sitting duck.
- Team Ninja did not write the story. Got it.
- By completing the game, I obviously made it past the point I was stuck on for hours, and I became a slightly better player as a result, despite the limiting controls. But finishing the game also confirmed my opinion: the level design of Other M isn’t as fun to play as other Metroid games.
And just to reiterate my final recommendation so it doesn’t get overlooked, “If you are on the fence, rent Other M or wait to hear reviews from friends with similar tastes before spending $50. If you’re already set on buying Other M, don’t say I didn’t warn you of its shortcomings. Three stars out of five.”
A note from The Bosshog
Hi, everyone. There seems to be some confusion regarding the timing and personnel involved in our review. Let me explain. Although I originally intended to review Other M, I got tied up with both work and life stuff last week and was unable to. That’s why Mark, a long-time but infrequent contributor, got the call.
Having played the first two hours of the game, I agree with Mark’s three star assessment of Other M. It’s not the kind of quality you’d expect from Nintendo, especially for one of its most popular franchises. In the canon of the series, it’s obvious Other M is no where near Super Metroid or Metroid Zero status. With exception to Metroid II (which I never played and am therefore unqualified to compare to), I’d say Other M is inferior to every other game in the series. Not only a contender for “weakest Metroid ever,” but borderline mediocre.
As for “Hey, why did you break the review embargo?” business, Infendo has never and will never sign or agree to any formal review embargo with any company’Nintendo included. We have respected informal wishes of companies in the past (such as “please don’t post until…“), but upon completing our opinion on Thursday, and after Famitsu, Game Informer, and Nintendo Power reviews were made public earlier that morning, we decided to run the review a day early. If that bothers you, I’m afraid we may disappoint you again, depending on the situation (i.e. our readers come first).
As for our review policy, we have never and will never require the completion of a game before forming an opinion on it. Since these are for-profit consumer products, I feel no shame in walking away from and recommending against a game, even an incomplete one’even a high-profile one like Metroid. That said, we’ll do a better job in the future disclosing how much of a game we have completed, so you can form your own opinion.
Image credit: Will Thompson
"Well-worded, fair, and completely accurate."
Bullcrap. This game is awesome, and I'm hoping people get fired for this.
So poo on you. Poo on you Jack, and poo on you Mark.
Lars Flyger said:
"Bullcrap. This game is awesome, and I'm hoping people get fired for this."
I speak fluent fanboy: "How dare your opinion be different than mine?! This is an outrage!"
Thanks for using my picture of the credits. Good job.
all men are entitled opinion.
that being said, though i have not yet gotten a chance to play the game, i still think it looks really good. i apologize if this may offend anyone at infendo but i must say that the reviewer seemed to have been against the game from the start, i think like one or two of your posts stated extreme anger towards the fact that the game was going to have cut-scenes. in my personal experience if you go into something with a negative mindset there's not much that's going to change. but then again i won't be able to tell if this review is fully accurate until i acquire and complete the game.
@ Jack: wouldn't you be afraid of something that was suppose to be dead…well..blown up, in an exploding planet no less, only to find out that thing still lives?
@ Linkaro
The psychology behind that scene was realistic. Most people won't agree with it though.
@ nin,
I had no preconceived notions going into this game. In fact, quite the opposite. Blake will confirm that I was very excited to play this game. I had no intentions of giving a negative review in any way.
I was disappointed by the quality of the review. I was more disappointed by the quality of some of the comments. My opinion of Infendois that it has been a haven for smart, passionate, reasonable people to meet and discuss Nintendo. The opposite of sites like NeoGAF, Joystiq, Kotaku…etc, etc.
Mistakes were made by the staff. They have been admitted, and they have taken steps to correct the situation. It sounds like Infendo will be a better site, with higher quality, in the future. I hope the comments follow suit.
"Having played THE FIRST TWO HOURS of the game, I agree with Mark's three star assessment of the game." Way to fail once again, INFERIORendo. Almost every review I've read states that the first hour of the game is entirely misleading about the rest of the experience. And why would you try to cover for Mark's half-completed game review by saying you played THE FIRST TWO HOURS OF THE GAME?
I wish this post was titled:
Apologies: We screwed up when we did a 1/2 review of a premiere
Nintendo title on a Nintendo themed blog, we will do better next time.
@ Will: That…mostly be the case with these type of games.
Thanks for the follow-up, Mark and Blake!
So nice to know that despite this game's obvious mediocrity, it managed to earn a 81% rating on Metacritic! 😀
"The psychology behind that scene was realistic. Most people won't agree with it though."
Then why didn't Samus have the same reaction when she encountered Ridley in Metroid Prime? Or Metroid Prime 3? Or Super Metroid? Or Metroid Fusion? After all Ridley was supposed to be dead at the beginning of those games too. And in each of those games her reaction was "Oh hey, its Ridley, I should start shooting him in the face now." There's nothing realistic about that scene at all. Its just Sakamoto inserting in drama for the sake of drama. If Link encountered Ganondorf in Majora's Mask would you have expected him to behave the same way that Samus did in that scene?
Even with all that though, based on the whole panning shot where Samus turns into a little kid for a few seconds, its clear that its not an "Oh my God Ridley's still alive when I thought he was dead" reaction, its just an "Oh my God, its Ridley, he killed my parents, commence emotional breakdown" reaction.
There is no excuse for that scene. And it pisses me off every time I see it.
@ Mark
If a Metroid game is ranked higher than Metroid II or the original, is it a mediocre Metroid game? In my experience, no. Those are two of my favorite Metroid games. Not that "rankings" mean much anyway.
@Poochy
I agree. I think review scores are pointless which is why I think all this bickering about this review is silly, but you kept bringing up review scores in the other section and implying that they held meaning, and then brought up the metacritic rating in this one as evidence that iot wasn't mediocre, so I brought it up too.
If you agree that they're silly though, then awesome. I really don't give two shits what reviewers think about a game, all that matters to me is my opinion, and the opinions of my friends.
Just to clarify, that Mark is a different Mark than this Mark. Make sense. Although I do agree with that Mark. Must be in the name.
He finished the game and sticks by his 3 stars. That's all I wanted, so I'm fine with this opinion. In fact, I will rent first. If that was your intention of your review then you win.
@mark
my bad, the post must have been made by another staff member
I'm lost: Why do people care?
I saw the review (the first one), saw that he said he played only the first few hours, and thought to myself, "Well, alright. I'll take it for what it is, as a game reviewer probably needs a good reason to give a game with this much hype a 3/5."
So, since I took it for what it was, I played the game myself. Have to say, I agree with the review (both of them).
On the topic of why Samus is so "emotional" in some of those scenes: My impression of Samus was that, as a bounty hunter, she acts cool under pressure. Her ability to face off against Ridley a number of times, and do so without crippling under fear, gave me a pre-conceived notion about Samus being a little "hardier" than the way she was showcased in that scene.
But that's just me. When someone makes a game that takes place almost halfway to the end of the Metroid "timeline," their job should not be to overwrite the implied "character" of the protagonist.
But that's just me.
And why didn't you finish the game BEFORE posting the first review, and do it NOW? That's what supposed to be done on a page that gives game reviews. A sad day on Infendo's reputation.
Alright, you finished the game and still feel it deserves a 3 star. That's fine with me. It's certainly the lowest score on the internet, but the lowest score has to come from somewhere.
Thank you Mark for finishing the game.
Now as punishment for your little boo boo, start reviewing the next Imagine Babiez game asap – and I want a fully detailed review! 2000 word minumum, go!
@Soma:
"As for our review policy, we have never and will never require the completion of a game before forming an opinion on it. Since these are for-profit consumer products, I feel no shame in walking away from and recommending against a game, even an incomplete one—even a high-profile one like Metroid. That said, we'll do a better job in the future disclosing how much of a game we have completed, so you can form your own opinion."
Can't blame him for following Infendo's policy. If you have a problem with it, just don't pay attention to their reviews anymore, but you can't blame the reviewers for following the policy that they were given to work within.
I do appreciate that the boss laid out Infendo's review process. It's sort of refreshing to see a site basically say "Yeah, we have a lackadaisical, half-assed approach to reviewing games that serves absolutely nobody. So what of it?"
youre little embargo speech will probably stop you from receiving review copies. i'm sure someone has already sent emails to nintendo
I don't need to finish a game to tell how good or bad it is. Most games are freaking long, and if you're not into it, for god's sake quit and find a game that is a better use of your limited free time… that's what I say.
James, I'd prefer it if you spent less time posting on blogs and more time writing and drawing more Hulk vs. the Rain comic strips. I may or may not be kidding.
Signed,
Demanding Fanboi.
Does that include Metroid Prime Hunters as a game it beat in worst Metroid game?
Yeah this brazen crappy review process is probably the worst thing Infendo's ever done.
Any explanation or apology afterward felt more like "Oh shit they caught us" damage control instead of addressing quite pointed criticism.
And yeah, we as consumers of your reviews, do expect you to play all of the game before you give your final review. Nobody is saying you can't rag on it or you can't have your opinions, but they should be fully formed opinions, and leave no room for question. That you simply played for an hour and then review it is not sufficient for professional grade reviewing, as is expected with your free review copy and advance playing.
Of course, you can say that you aren't professionals, and use your amateur status to get out of the responsibility of professionalism. But then expect your readers to either leave or have the same regard for any opinion you choose to foster later. One sentence in, they x out knowing it to be trash. And that's too bad, really.
(BTW, saying "G4TV agrees with us!" isn't the best way to get your point closer to wide acceptance. G4 is the worst channel ever conceived, filled to the brim with industry backed gamer stereotypes that do nothing but hype up their latest DLC scheme. That they don't like this new Metroid makes me want to buy it MORE, not less.)
@Go-getter:
You are not a "consumer" for following Infendo. Consuming implies that you took something that was tangible, something that someone spent time, money and resources into making, took the final product, and exacted some sort of repayment to the "producer."
You cannot "consume" an idea, thought or opinion. You can listen to, interpret, understand, accept or deny it.
Whilst these reviewers are paid to do their job, you do not pay for any service they provide to you, directly or otherwise. Subscription to Infendo is free, and their sponsors allow them to stay afloat.
It saddens me that some people feel obligated to bash people for having different opinions than they do. The fact that Mark gave a review that was made after five hours of play time did not bother me in the slightest. He followed Infendo's policy, and by saying that he had only played part-way through, I decided to read other reviews from people who had completed the game (as well as play through it myself) to reaffirm that what he was saying at least had some grain of truth to it.
I've seen many reviewers and friends of mine, who have played games partway through, opt to complete them when friends have calmly and encouragingly urged them to complete them (stating various reasons why it would be worth it, and why their opinion of the game may be incomplete after only a partial playthrough).
However, it is both rude and narcissistic to go to that same friend and claim that their opinion is unprofessional, incompetent, worthless or baseless simply because they did not choose to complete their product. Rather than encourage Mark to finish by giving him reasons the game would improve, you and others, go-getter, have simply spat insults in his face and claim that it is HIS reputation or Infendo's that has diminished, and not your own. If you expect to be respected and seen as mature in any situation, how does an arrogant tone and holier-than-thou attitude help?
I enjoy Infendo a lot but I had a problem with this whole Metroid: Other M review situation. First off I expect reviewers to finish a game completely before they write a review of it, end of story. Why? Because to me finishing a game means that the reviewer has thoroughly gone through the game and knows exactly what they are talking about when they review it.
Most reviewers get review copies of games early and for free, which most readers don't have the luxury of. If Infendo wants to be taken seriously as a game review site they have got to take their reviews more seriously. Sorry but why should I trust the opinion of someone who got the game for free and only played 2-4 hours of it when I have to shell our $50 for the game.
Also even though Mark did the writeup in my opinion this is an Infendo endorsed review, if there is a strongly differing opinion at Infendo there should be a second review. Statements like "Having played the first two hours of the game, I agree with Mark's three star assessment of Other M. " worry me because I expect that before the review even goes out there would be some discussion at Infendo as to the opinions on the game.
I'm looking forward to more reviews from Infendo but I hope that a more mature and standardized process gets put into place in terms of reviews.
Sorry I just wanted to correct: instead of 2-4 it should be 5 hours.
I think the problem people are having with other M is how far it strays from what we're used to. Now, I don't agree 100% with how they portray samus, but it begs the question: How would you expect her to be? I mean, you don't want a completely cold-stone action hero because the heavy story would get boring. I do admit though: I would have preferred that nintendo put more time on gameplay and other mechanics instead of such a heavy dwelling on Samus's emotional problems, but you can't blame them for trying something new. Besides, Nintendo is a company that learns from their mistakes most of the time, so if Nintendo ever gets that ambitious urge again then they should end up doing it better. Now what I'm waiting for is a side-scroller metroid game for the 3DS… THAT would be cool. :]
I was playing Nintendo before some of you were born. Ive played every Metroid game to date. I have a hand-made Samus knit cap.
Ease back on your big epeens folks! Infendo is a good site, it will continue to get better!
Ultimately Marks review was accurate. What have we learned?
@ Octorok
"I was playing Nintendo before some of you were born."
I have been playing Nintendo games since the late 80's.
"Ive played every Metroid game to date."
So have I. But what do either of these statements have to do with anything, I wonder?
"Ultimately Marks review was accurate."
Says who? Infendo, a blog that most people aren't even aware exists, or IGN, Kotaku, Wired, Gametrailers, Nintendo Power, Famitsu, and Joystiq?
Apparently some people haven't learned anything. Some people would rather live a bubble, convincing themselves that solid 8s, 8.5s, and 9s from leading gaming media sites like the aforementioned doesn't indicate that this is a higher quality title than Mark says it is. Some people would rather take Mark's word as gospel rather than form an opinion for themselves, and thus go around proclaiming this to be the most "mixed" and "polarizing" Metroid games when in reality it's getting higher scores than Metroid II, the second best-selling Metroid game has.
Having read most of the comments on every topic regarding 'Metroidgate', I have to say I'm definitely leaning towards defending Infendo and a lot of fellow commenters. Infendo never did anything wrong. Why? That's obvious:
If the Infendo policy reads that you don't have to complete the game before reviewing it, then so be it. Readers who don't like this don't have to be here and read the reviews because of that. It's your own choice, no one is forcing you to do so.
I think most readers are astonished and amazed that such a policy (or 'rule') even exists, but I'd put my hand into fire if you can find no other game reviewing site that has a (silent) rule stating the exact same thing.
As a gaming journalist, you simply might not have all the time to review the tons of games coming at you. Even if there's some games which might be worth playing more than others. Heck, it's even difficult to do so without being a journalist.
Besides (and this is a more valid point), if you're 5 hours in, and you still don't have the feeling that the game is turning a little bit better or fleshed out, it feels perfectly fine to give it less points/stars/bubbles/mushrooms/whatever.
You don't have to finish a game to be able to rate it: a game should be good from the moment you hear the first tune, you see the first characters: you start playing. It should suck you into its world, keep you on your edge, and most of all, be fun to play! And this can't be stressed enough.
If the fun of the game might start after 5 hours of play, the game is not good enough. It should've been there from the beginning.
That said, I completely follow Infendo's way of reviewing, and I believe what has been written. Metroid: Other M won't be a buy for me. Well, I wasn't sitting on the fence anyway, but still, it's always nice to see what reviewers think. Ultimately, for me, the game could've been so much more without being 'dumbed down', so to speak. But Nintendo/Team Ninja missed the opportunity to flesh out these new mechanics.
And Mark, keep it up. You just had the bad luck of doing this review. Any other Infendo writer would've hit this wall of comments. It would not have influenced the outcome.
Well all the reviews online and from smaller sources (except Game Informer) say the game is meh or just flat out sucks. All the major sources say it's good. I'm not saying Nintendos paying anyone off, but more objective sources have a more critical opinion of the game, and I trust that more.
That said, I completely follow Infendo's way of reviewing, and I believe what has been written. Metroid: Other M won't be a buy for me. Well, I wasn't sitting on the fence anyway, but still, it's always nice to see what reviewers think. Ultimately, for me, the game could've been so much more without being ‘dumbed down', so to speak. But Nintendo/Team Ninja missed the opportunity to flesh out these new mechanics.
So in other words, all the positive reviews coming from major sources don't mean diddly-squat to you, and you won't try the game for yourself because….well, just because?
In other words, you're an idiot, yes?
@ Poochy:
Well, yes, that's what I'm saying. Being one of the big guns doesn't necessarily mean everything they say is correct or that I should take everything they say for granted.
To add a little bit to what progressiveaudio said (in the post above yours): they just say what everyone wants or expects to hear, more or less. If everyone's pumped for a game, then they'll write exactly the words everyone wants to hear. It seems like they can't afford to bring down big-buck games. It kind of feels like: the bigger the gaming site, the more likely it's biased towards 'blockbuster' games.
Smaller gaming sources can still do as they please without too much consequences. Possibly because they have a smaller reader install base and are less mainstream. And that's exactly what makes them a lot more interesting than the big shots.
Well, that's how I feel like anyway.
And, for the record, I won't try this game because, to my knowledge, I can't rent a game in my neighbourhood. So I'd have to buy it. Which, at this point, is a no-go.
@ Marcus
"You are not a “consumer†for following Infendo. Consuming implies that you took something that was tangible, something that someone spent time, money and resources into making, took the final product, and exacted some sort of repayment to the “producer.â€"
What his review doesn't exist? I didn't repay him by providing click-throughs for ad money? Of course both the previous statements are false. He was given a game for free, the least he could do was play all of it before trashing it.
"It saddens me that some people feel obligated to bash people for having different opinions than they do."
Why can't I have opinions about those opinions? The 1st Amendment only seems to apply in one direction lately.
Anyway, that's all of your comment I'm going to read. I can now sufficiently declare your post to be complete garbage.
You could comment on this, but it's an intellectual quagmire.
@Poochy: Maybe the infendo reviewer is using a different perspective or judging by different values from major gaming sites. As an analogy, an athlete who is in peak physical condition would probasbly have little use for Wii Fit, but to the average shlub, it could be a helpful addition to his life. It's not that either opinion is wrong, it's just that they come from different perspectives.
Given that, maybe the whole reason people are reading this site is that they don't subscribe to the values of IGN, Famitsu, etc. and value the Infendo reviews precisely because they have a different set of values.
What I'm saying is that it's possible the people reading this review know exactly what they're doing and your appeals to the consensus of a group of writers that everyone in the conversation is already aware of doesn't contribute anything to the discussion.
That non-contribution would be forgivable if it wasn't presented with such smug boorishness. You should be ashamed of yourself.
LMAO! That Web site is the most laughable thing I've ever seen… of course you wouldn't retract your original review – as stuborness and unprofessionnalism requires such methods. To push the line even further, we had to read an editorial saying that "you didn't need to finish games for reviews", which wasn't received very positively by your readers. And now that you've completed the game, you still don't rewrite your review, but you justify it? As if the score you gave it ever bothered anyone and was the cause for controversy. No, the cause for controversy was the awful writing, lack and denial of factual evidence to back up your arguments and contradictory statements.
This Web site is a serious joke, oh and talking about professionnalism: you guys posted the review one day before the allowed day by Nintendo. Which means that either you have a cracked copy or that you don't give a **** about the little memo from Nintendo saying you couldn't post a complete review before last friday. Unprofessionnal, yet again.
Lord_Vynos
@Go-getter:
Fair enough. I'll organize my post from important down to inconsequential for you, for this response.
You should always follow through on information when an incomplete statement or idea is given. In your case, you said you didn't read my entire post. Therefore, you could conclude that I was acting in a certain way, or that my post had a certain mood or message. However, to be sure that your opinion is factually accurate, you should look at how other people interpret that idea to ensure that the messages you saw resonated with other people.
However, as I said in that same post, I will encourage you like an old friend to read the rest of my post. I made that point that gentle encouragement often goes farther in getting someone to try something they dislike rather than bashing them or shooting implied insults at them.
Example for how people could validate accurate messages from Mark's incomplete review:
* He said the 2D-3D graphics system was polished and the shift from 3rd to 1st person was smooth – A view echoed by many game reviewers
* He complains of clunky controls -> IGN and other reviews agreed that First Person can be troublesome if not annoying at certain points
* Complaints about cutscenes and dry storyline/voice acting -> Echoed by longtime fans, and some impartial ones
* Complaints of a lengthy introduction -> Echoed by many reviewers, including IGN
* Complaints of linear gameplay = Opinionated, a job each reviewer should have, and acceptable if he claimed to be stuck in one spot for hours on end
^* Complaints of the weapons system and Samus' loss of items -> Echoed by fans disturbed at Samus' characterization and storyline
Apart from his complaints about linear gameplay (which encompass the management of weapons and unlocks), all of his arguments were echoed by at least a large number of people who also played this game, and many of whom played all the way through. If he had played through, he may have had a different view of the linear gameplay, but again, this was his opinion.
If you disliked his opinion, or felt it was incomplete because he didn't finish the game, looking at other reviews and seeing these common elements at least mentioned in one way or another means that Mark did experience many of the same things, and that his view on the game as a whole is based on how he personally weighed each of these problems.
It is the job of each game reviewer to be opinionated, and having played the other Metroid games, to base Other M on his experiences with past titles. If he, as a fan of the series, felt off-put by the game, it should be his right to state so, no?
I'm not really sure what people are complaining about. I mean, you got your concession. He did admit, that there were things about his review that could have been reprimanded in order to make it a better piece.
Isn't this the "victory" so many of the naysayers were after?
At this point it's just a matter of whether your opinion lines up with the reviewer's or not. Is it really necessary to devote this much time to someone being wrong on the internet?
@Frexy – "and that's exactly what makes them a lot more interesting than the big shots."
The specific review isn't the issue here, I don't have a problem that Mark didn't like the game. It's the way the game was reviewed, giving a bad review and then telling readers "oh by the way you don't need to finish a game to review it". That's what my main issue was. If in your opinion that makes Infendo more interesting that's fine but to me that is lazy and sloppy video game journalism no matter how you try and spin it.
@Joe:
"The specific review isn't the issue here, I don't have a problem that Mark didn't like the game. It's the way the game was reviewed, giving a bad review and then telling readers “oh by the way you don't need to finish a game to review itâ€."
Point taken, although I do still think it is possible to review a game even though it's not finished.
If you, as a player, have difficulties with certain aspects of the game from the beginning, and they don't seem to be getting any better during a 5-hour play, I do feel you can extract a good opinion on how the rest of the game is.
Look at it as if you are attending a rock/dance/whatever festival. You want to check out a band because you've heard they can blow your feet out of your socks.
When you are listening to them, however, you can't help but notice that they've been playing average songs for the first 3/4 hour.
You're left with 2 choices. You leave, knowing that the songs won't be any better and there's other bands playing better anyway, or you stay, hoping that the band will somehow pick up pace and give a hell of a party in the last 15 minutes.
Either way, the fact that the first 3/4 hour weren't that good won't make you magically change your mind on how brilliant the band was overall, because you still know how disappointing the first part was, even if they did blow the roof of the stage in the last quart hour. Giving your final opinion after the first 45 minutes would've been accurate enough.
A party should be a good party from the beginning to the end, and not from somewhere after the middle part. That's only somewhat above average, at best.
Although this analogy is not completely without flaws, you get the picture.
@Frexy:
I 100% get that argument, I just don't agree with it. I've been to concerts, watched movies, listened to CD's that in the beginning didn't impress me but by the end I really enjoyed. It just seemed to me that Mark tried Metroid: Other M and when it didn't fit into the mold of any of the previous Metroid games he dismissed it and stopped playing. A quote from the Gamespot review summarizes it best imo:
"People expecting Other M to conform to the elements that made Super Metroid and Metroid Prime classics may be disappointed at first, but stick with it. This is another great entry in the series, and a refreshing change of pace for the well-traveled bounty hunter."
@Kale
If convoluted and talent-less storytelling is "brave"—not to mention imprecise controls—I'd rather be playing a game made by a coward.
@Lord_Vynos: Confirming evidence doesn't overturn a hypothesis. This is a fact of logic.
Summary of review:
"There are cutscenes?! Samus has actual emotions?! METROID IS RUINED FOREVER!!!"
A game should be fully played before giving a review. All modes, all options. Unless the difficulty/controls out-right prevents the reviewer from progressing at a satisfying rate. Still, 80-90% of the game should have been finished (read finished, not "completed").
Talking about a few hours of the game is called an IMPRESSION… NOT a "review". This is irresponsible. Because the game, as a whole, is actually NOT being reviewed. You loose accreditation AND respect.
A movie reviewer that walks out of a movie in the first 30 minutes, cannot give a review… because they didn't see the whole movie. It is then an Impression.