Game "reviewers" literally list >It isn't a

Where?

>>384465182

Generally everywhere, I'm seeing it more and more on later times. Just this morning I was skimming through a tech magazine at the mall and there it was again, on some random game
>You don't shoot anything here, so you might not enjoy it

File: IMG_1515.png (440KB, 956x657px) Image search: [Google]

440KB, 956x657px

Do you not understand that they review video games for a "living"?

nice proof faggot

File: thcwhq4zzpxpk2sc34euzdeyyd3zvkr7_hq.jpg (29KB, 640x348px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 640x348px

I don't need reviews. I've been playing video games since the snes/genesis era and by now I know the types of games I like/dislike. I still get a few surprises by not caring about reviews.

Nights of Azure for example. I enjoyed it alot and can't wait for part 2.

>>384465814

>still get a few surprises by not caring about reviews.

Same, I've lost count to how many
>What do you mean you don't care about what linusshilltips says
I've gotten. Still irks me this is the "unbiased journalism" we have now. I remember that this same magazine did the same shit when The Last Guardian came out. No mention about the frame drops or the camera having a mind of its own, which were its legitimate flaws. Nope, the con of the game was "it's not a shooter, so it won't please everyone".
I mean shit, its like bitching about a case aesthetics or the controller's color.