I've never been a fan of downgrading a game because it's niche. Everyone will never like everything and just because one game tilts to an 'exclusive club' doesn't make it worst. I loathe Tolkien inspired fantasy games, that doesn't make them bad. I probably could never enjoy Kirby's new game, because the it is on the opposite side of the spectrum as far as skill. It isn't a worse built game because of it though. I believe it warrants mention to inform people, but one shouldn't presume it being a positive or negative to the audience.

I'd try it but the story sounds a bit shit.
Also the short length of the game does kinda put me off paying full price.

Woah, didn´t see this coming , lousy story was expected, I guess overcompensating with your penile ubar graphx doesn´t make it worth it :P It sure is pretty tough :D I remember getting stuck in the first demo at the boss because i used up all my ammo while trying to figure out what to do , it ended with a angry phone call to my brother then a inevitable console shutdown.

I see people getting worked up over 5/10 ratings, and I don't think they realize that in this site 5=average. People seem to believe that a 7 is average (I see them say this) and no, that's "fine, but maybe glitchy or has some bullshit gimmick). A 5 is average. Jims ( or whoever else's score that someone may not agree with) giving something a 5 or lower doesn't translate into a 8 because other people have given it a 8. It's just that reviewers each have different opinions and different views on how a scoring system works. A few reviewers just slide the "average" number higher so they don't piss of the developers and publishers they sorely need access to.

Commentors here have said here "your playing it wrong (which has become more of an in joke than anything) but there are others who really believe this when they read a review like this, or think that some wonky ass control system/game mechanic needs to be mastered like some secret art instead of acknowledging it's crap. Just because someone is able to work it doesn't make it fine.

TL;DR, Reviews are opinions, Metacritic isn't the god of judging a game as being good, and if most of the people can't get a control system/game mechanic, then it's been done wrong. Kudos if you can work it.

It's incredibly sad that there are people so emotionally unstable that they can't simply accept that I did not like the game. They always have to try and discredit the opinion by making assumptions and pulling conspiracies out of their ass. Are people so intolerant of a conflicting opinion that they would rather invent agendas and throw around insulting accusations than admit that their favorite videogames can't get 9/10 scores from every single reviewer? If you love Vanquish, then wonderful. Go play it. Have fun. Some of us demand something more from Platinum. Grow up and accept that not everybody is going to justify your purchasing plans.

Yea Jim you're right. BUT I don't like it when people simply say things like "oh guess I won't buy it then." I mean at least look at more than one person's perspective! Everyone has an opinion and they're not all the same.

To further expand on my previous comment now that I've played the game more.

If you are spending more than half of the game hiding behind cover, you're not necessarily playing it wrong, but you're not taking advantage of the abilities your character has.

It's a surprisingly simple set up, all things considered, but you can do SO MUCH with it. In the demo alone I spent hours just practicing chucking grenades, vaulting over cover, then going into bullet time to shoot the grenade in mid air while it was amidst groups of bad guys for maximum carnage. You have to be aggressive. Even taking cover should be a means to simply put you closer to the enemy so you can smoke a quick cigarette, toss it to distract them, then vault over and unload hell in their faces before they can even react.

You can die surprisingly fast in this game, but that doesn't mean you should just hang back and play it safe.

Think of how 'manly' characters in Gears of War profess to being or act, but at the end of the day, they just scrable from cover to cover, cower under fire, and occasionally pull off a sick melee kill. Being out in the open is a death sentence in GoW, with very little in the way of evasive options.

In Vanquish, you can choose to be like those losers, or your can remember than there isn't a goddamn thing in the game you can't deal with single handedly, and play it as such.

To actually illustrate my point, here is a video of someone using all the tools at his disposal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1fGA-WMXUk

I'm with EdgyDude. This review sounds similar to Madworld complaints. Also, that's not a criticism of you Jim. I'm just wondering what happened to Platinum. They haven't been the same since Capcom let them go. ALL of their PS2 outings are fantastic, with God Hand being the only wildcard. This time, it's reversed, with Bayonetta being their only unanimous hit. I've learned a long while ago that bigger and prettier doesn't always mean better when it comes to games, and this proves it yet again.

5 out of 10? Are we serious here? Or pandering a poor score for traffic? Not only are there inaccuracies in the review that reek of a rushed or incomplete play-through, but the tone reeks of someone that might be in a rage quit kinda mood.

Are reviews on this site even serious? I loved Deadly Premonition, but we are talking 7/10 max there. Is this site just a total piss take?

Well, they don't all turn out good do they? I was afraid the game would end up as repetitive from the gameplay. Length was inevitable though, just look at Madworld. I'm sure the game is still fun to play, I'll pick it up when it hits the bargain bin. That is, after I actually get a PS3/360 and play the demo. From that little piece of info my opinion should be taken with a grain of salt.

This was a good review though, your opinions were based on facts about the game, you just felt more strongly about flaws that others. Keep on doing your thing Jim, like they say, haters gonna hate.

There are good ways of designing a difficult game and bad ways of designing a difficult game. You don't "suck at games" if you dare to point out those moments when a game relies on lazy design in order to make a game hard, and anybody who uses that argument is a fucking child who is afraid to get into a real discussion about the subject.

Also, my study of the numbers show that our reviews generally generate the same amount of traffic regardless of how negative or positive they are, so anybody who uses the "lol trolling for hits" argument is an ignorant fool.

Of course, this game is probably still pretty fun. Only the player can define if the game is "fun" or not, the review only means as much as you think it does. I mentioned Madworld's length, but it was still a blast. (just not worth $50) If this game is really like Madworld then all the better.

what makes this is even hilarious is vanquish actually uses a quote from destructoid on their box "bloody terrific".

im just wondering, after the "i just dont like it" comment. you do realize there is a difference between not liking something and the quality of the product. for example, i think citizen kane (regarded as one of the best movies ever made) is garbage and i really dont like it, but i do think it is a very good movie. or a game like deadly premonition which i really enjoyed and thought it was fantastic. but as a finished product, quality wise it really wasnt fantastic at all.

maybe you do not make this distinction and that should be taken consideration with the reviewers who are very adamant about disagreeing with your reviews. they should view it as a good source of oh yes he like it or didnt and not as a good source of critique.

I see Edge gave it an 8.

FUCKING SURPRISE It looks like SEGA ran out of money for this game. This is a good tech demo but the overall game is tedious as shit. The problem is SEGA are owned by SAMMY who are fucking pikeys. Now Platinum and Grasshopper pimped themselves out to EA we should get longer development and fine ass QA time. At least Shadow of the Damned has a proper script:

"I am Garcia Hotspur. Hunter of demons. My wrath is your hell motherfuckers" {splashes Absinthe over newly cut throat tattoo then flip-y-a'll motherfucker with the custom switchblade, see}

I mean this in no offense, but in lieu of the high ratings Jim's given to cakewalk games: can anyone name a difficult game or two he's given a high score?

What a joke. I'd post my thoughts here, but instead I made a blog entry to fully describe my thoughts on this "review".

http://www.destructoid.com/my-response-to-destructoid-s-vanquish-review-

Constructive feedback:

I thought it was really great of Destructoid to look past the obvious flaws of a game like Deadly Premonition and review it for what it was: a great game. It had technical problems, it had mediocre graphics, it had things that a "normal" review might consider flaws, but Destructoid looked past all that and said "thats kind of missing the point" (not the actual quote)

Reviews like that one are the reason I keep coming back to Destructoid.

And then there are reviews like this one. Where IGN was "wrong" for giving Deadly Premonition a 3, because they missed the point, I would argue that you are wrong for giving Vanquish a 5, as much as one could possibly be wrong (which is to say its just an opinion that means absolutely nothing), because you are just as guilty of missing the point.

Vanquish is like God Hand the remake for a new generation. God Hand had horrible graphics, an insane plot, "repetitive" gameplay and all sorts of things people just "didn't get", yet I, and a great number of people who "got it", would call it a perfect game. Why? In the same way Deadly Premonition transcended a normal review because it hit the proverbial "spot", God Hand represents a definitive game, a game that understands what it intend to do and then actually does it. Its actual experience transcends what exists on paper.

I wouldn't be bringing up God Hand if Vanquish wasn't so obviously meant for the same audience, and audience of people who like to set the difficulty up to (God) hard and master a game to its very core. Its a game about being a man, getting the tools to be as manly as possible, and then making the game your bitch. If you dont use those tools its fine, thats your own choice, but by doing so you ultimately miss the "point" of the game, and by missing the point your review ultimately misses the point.

Does the review literally sum up the game? Yes. Does it capture the experience of actually playing the game as intended? No.

You hit the nail right on the head Mega Buster. I generally choose to sit back and enjoy all the hate and slander that comes Jim's way when he writes a review and gives a score that is essentially the polar opposite of most other reviewers in the industry.And yes, polar opposite was meant to be somewhat exaggerant to get my point across, but it has been a long standing opinion of mine to judge every game on my own merit scale and play them myself before deciding on a hate or great review. I can also see where everyone is coming from when they disagree with the things he says, weather valid criticisms or just plain rubbish from his reviews, but you can always just disregard any review that he does, see his name for a game review, don't click on it or take it with a grain of salt. Mega Buster mentioned it, and I'll mention it, he's given many games I loved, enjoyed or just plain had fun with low or really low scores. His review didn't sway my opinion, make or break a purchase, it just made me realize that I don't consider him a reliable source for "professional" opinions on games. He's funny, I enjoyed his colorful commentary of things in the video game world before destructoid, Morphine Nation was good, but after that, I just don't care. Anyone who get's pissed off, don't take it personal, just go read another review, it's 99% likely that it will be more attuned to your "I like this game to" expectations. Shit reviews aside, all he has to say is I get paid to sit on my big Brit ass all day and play games, I can only guess a few people wouldn't mind doing the same. Oh well, time to finish the last act of Vanquish, which is an F'in fun game and I loved every minute of it so far.

whos the one being quoted as saying "bloody terrific" on the box? maybe they should have reviewed the game.

First Assassin's Creed 2, then Lost Planet 2 and now this. I think I should just start buying games that you give a low score, since they're usually my favorites. Strange, right? I like your complaints on the repetitiveness of the game. It's pretty ironic since I see you wear the same black blazer and mirrored aviators in every picture of you, but now I'm just getting into ad hominems.

Why won't you tell us which difficulty level you played the game on, Jim?

I'm not trolling - I think this kind of information should be provided in a review to give context to what you're saying.

It must be difficult to review games all the time when it seems like you suck at playing them so much.

When you take a Shinji Mikami game, from Platinum Games, and say that the moves have no depth and no use, you better be able to back it up. Sadly, anyone with any skill at this game already knows that what you said is exaggerated and false. Nearly anyone playing the game on the upper difficulty levels could upload videos showing how you use the slide, the melee attacks, and the slow down effectively.

Next you're going to probably go on about how Enslaved has a good combat system. Give me a break.

At least the review is still readable though. Just paste it into a word document, and anytime it mentions a game mechanic being useful because it gets him killed, delete that part and replace it with "and I'm not very good at the game so it got me killed."

To be fair, the point of arcade cover shooter is leaderboard finesse, but let's at least give a nod to the "Challenges" section of the game menu. Also you can activate the slow mo during any acrobatic move Sam makes. Jumping over cover? dodging to the left? rocket gliding away from a missile? And I don't discredit Jim's frustration with finding good cover, but i can say for myself, the times I died while behind cover were due to a hidden enemy or huge explosion.

I agree with another user that this is essentially NOT a cover shooter. A good comparison would be the Wanted game, with its brief play time yet long legs. Judging this game's length solely on the duration of a single playthru is a tad disingenuous to the game's point.

I absolutely hated the demo for this game. I thought it was a garbage version of Gears. The only decent part were the boss battles, which still went on for too long.

In fact, this review make me want this game even more. Exept for bug and bad camera, all others forms of challenging are good for me, cheap or not :3

This is you at your absolute worst Jim, sometimes I wonder if you do this type of review just for shock value or if you are truly genuine.

EIther way, it's incredibly sad.

From the back of the Vanquish box for PS3:

"Bloody Terrific - Destructoid"

Platinum wins this round...

Jim, I politely and respectfully disagree. *braces for the shitstorm* Nothing. Now, is that so hard guys?

Well ain't that a pisser. Too bad. I was really looking forward to this game. It looked like an amazing amalgam of Gears of War and Virtual On, something I'd totally expect coming from SEGA. What a shame.

Maybe I'll just play the demo and call it well enough.

castlevania review you put ''those easily impressed''. In this you put''smoke and mirrors''. People who like these games like them for the gameplay and other things. not that there ''easily impressed'', Olivia Munn. Dtoid + Gears2 = 9.0. one article later saying pple ruind multiplayer, even tho it was shit to begin with and u liked it, the another article later saying gears to was crap.... i think u put random review scores.

LOL ''this game is excellent, no two ways about''. What for? When 1 third of the game is multiplayer? gears 2. People getting mad at olivia munn and his reviews, dont be, he has no idea what hes talking about.

Two of the most technically polished games this generation, Vanquish and Castlevania: LoS get mediocre scores, and the reviews taking particular umbrage with "difficulty" and "cheap deaths."

Meanwhile Fallout: New Vegas, a rehash of an existing game that might as well have been a tirade of patched DLC, complete with even more game stopping bugs than its source F3, gets a 9.

Mr Sterling, your opinions are yours good man, but I feel you would be better suited as a movie critic where nothing is asked of you in the way of reflex, computation or reasonable rationale.

Read this:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vanquish-blog-entry

Read this:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vanquish-blog-entry

I was very disappointed with this game. I did a play through on hard and was generally frustrated with the lack of variety and stupid amount of cheap one-hit kills Jim spoke of. Also, the apparent misprint of the custom soundtrack support listing on the back of the PS3 North American version makes me glad I made this game a rental.

I finally got around to reading this review after putting it off for days and I have to say this is pretty much what I felt about the game. I wish I could say more about it, and I would if this new comment system allowed for paragraph breaks, but it comes down to 3 things, which were also outlined in the review: Cover system that doesn't actually cover you; more then once was I hit by NORMAL BULLETS coming from right in front of me, and more then once, specially during bosses I used the unintended, exploitative, cover of broken pieces of the environment (that were broken by the bosses) to win.... Then the boss battle length; The game wanted more of a battle of attrition then a knock out drag out fight and that's just wrong for this fast paced style of game. These fights were too long and many times I actually had to restart some of them because I had run completely out of ammo and couldn't find any more in the area....Pitiful Melee; I get its a shooter and you shouldn't be able to melee the hell out of it but when enemies can break through your cover zone, despite you having help from friends, sneak up on you without there being a way to see them and kill you, even if you get up to try to hand-to-hand them, then somethings wrong. Specially when you punch them and they still somehow have the upper hand and kill you. Sure I could have slid away; but in a game like this the instinct should be fight, not flight.

I love you Jim! Even if I dont agree with all your reviews Its just nice to see somebody with there own opinion. Never stop doing what you do.

I agree the game is a 5 (five). Like Jim I mashed all the buttons on my controller but the game would not work. The dude kept sliding along the floor every time. And that is why this game got 5 points. Kirby's 'all stitched up' has much better tactical gameplay than this piece of cuntwaste, see.

Oh god...

<p>
Why do I read Sterling's reviews? I read them to counteract all the other saccharin "oh its so cool and I will say it as you want to hear it" reviews. Very seldom have I read something Jim writes which I agree on, but I keep my mouth shut and revel at all the crybabies screaming to the high heavens on how biased he is or how "he is playing it wrong". Yes, sometimes he may have been biased and he may have played it wrong but he has always laid the cards on the table as he saw it and played it.</p>
<p>
 </p>
<p>
Keep it up, Mr. Sterling. I may seldom agree with you but your reviews ( and the tsunami of angry comments which follows ) never fail to make my day.</p>

<p>
Jim, you crack me up and all but I have to say.....</p>
<p>
I am pretty sure this review is more about how this game is just not your thing than it is a review. Of course, all reviews are just glorified (and justified) opinions but when your statements seem to all but dismiss the games good qualities. I  think your <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="position: static; cursor: default; background-color: rgb(181, 213, 255); ">anathema</span> to this style of old-school, story be damned game are conspiring against a balanced review.</p>
<p>
But, to each there own I guess.</p>
<p>
 </p>

<blockquote>
<p>
<em><span style="text-align: justify;">Even sticking to cover is pointless due to the amount of attacks that completely ignore the cover system and instakill Sam through solid walls.</span></em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>
<span style="text-align: justify;">How are you a game journallist?</span></p>
<blockquote>
<p>
<em><span style="text-align: justify;">Several times, I punched an enemy, failed to kill it thanks to Sam's inability to aim his punches properly, and was killed because I could neither defend myself or swiftly escape. </span></em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>
Pretty sure Sam is always able to successfuly auto-aim his target when he's close enough.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
<em><span style="text-align: justify;">if an enemy throws one of its death missiles at you while you're recharging, you're boned. Sam's dodge maneuver is pathetic and won't get him clear of the giant energy beams and explosions that endlessly come his way. </span></em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>
You actually can dodge them at the precise moment (not to mention watching the paterns).</p>
<blockquote>
<p>
<em><span style="text-align: justify;">Sam's glide ability is only useful for escaping (or trying to), since there's no point getting up close and killed because you have no power left. Any thoughts you had of sliding toward an enemy, murdering him in a flurry of punches, and deftly sliding away like an awesome space ninja better be abolished from your head -- everything you do in this game makes you vulnerable, weak, and ultimately dead. </span></em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>
Yeah, they didn't design the game around you being the ultimate space marine who's almost immune to death, but then that's what looking at the situation, boosting around acquiring said weapons to prepare for said assault, is for. EMPs, Frags, and Shotguns/Heavy Machine Guns (espcially being upgraded) may not be the ultimate form of effortless badassery but for a octane, twitch-based shooter that subjecatally advises to use strategy in making the completion of the challenge easier, the end result can still be like <span style="text-align: justify;">sliding toward an enemy, murdering him in a flurry of punches, and deftly sliding away like an awesome space ninja</span></p>
<p>
 </p>
<div>
<blockquote>
<p>
<em><span style="text-align: justify;">criminally dull</span></em></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p>
Soo..., fictionally speaking, you would compare a certain game that only allowed you to float around while shooting your machine guns and perhaps occantially take vertical cover if the level allows you to versus throwing a emp, then frag, then boost while shooting, melee the biggest target, then slow down as you fire biggest target in mid air, quickly dodge towards cover, light a smoke which then you quickly leap up over your cover and then perhaps lock on with launcher, snipe, multi-target, shred, or supress which resulted in having you killing multible Ruskie robots before you landed on the ground....</p>
<p>
I find it odd you'll respond to the more "immature" respones but never the maure ones like Kyousuke Nanbu's.</p>

"Several times, I punched an enemy, failed to kill it thanks to Sam's inability to aim his punches properly, and was killed because I could neither defend myself or swiftly escape."

The fact that you blamed this on the game is telling of your skill as a journalist. It was not Sam's fault. It was most definitely yours.

i thing this theme for share.... thanks you for artile. i'm waiting new article tomorrow
tips trik Cara Membuat Radio Streaming Murah dan perlu diingat kita harus STOP KORUPSI dan SUAP di Indonesia
anda butuh jasa seo murah atau butuh promosi?? perlunya web komunitas event organizer sebagai jurus marketing atau perlunya web komunitas event organizer dalam belajar Cara Membuat Radio Streaming Murah

There are some things in this review, Mr. Sterling, that you are correct about. Yes, I too was disappointed by the lack of Boss variety. I wish there could have been a better, more compelling story.

But almost every instance of your discussion of the gameplay mechanics is factually incorrect. If you do not land a melee attack, it does not deplete your energy meter.

"Sam's dodge maneuver is pathetic and won't get him clear of the giant energy beams and explosions that endlessly come his way. "

Excuse me? Have you tried dodging... twice in a row? On Youtube you can see a myriad of users dodging, boosting, and dodging again to avoid enormous flurries of deadly missiles and laser beams.

"There are a few extra weapons, but they're all discovered within the first 10% of the game and you'll soon learn that the assault rifle's the only useful gun anyway."

I agree, there should have been more weapons. I'm glad that Platinum finally released the Tri-Weapon DLC pack, and it really added a lot. However, "the assault rifle's the only useful gun anyway," is the one of the most inane things I've seen you type on this blog. Have you tried bowling over a Romanov with the LFE gun? Have you tried taking off an enormous chunk of a bosses' health with the Rocket Launcher? Have you use the Disc launcher's melee to -gasp- melee without depleting your ARS meter to cut off the heads and legs of the larger robots? Did you boost up to the UNKNOWN's unprotected form and hammer it with shotgun blasts?

Apparently not.

"This would be useful were it not for the fact that Sam's energy levels deplete rapidly, and once they go down, you'll need to wait for them to recharge."

Did it ever occur to you that you should avoid completely depleting your ARS meter? If you boost/dodge effectively, you can quite easily manage your ARS such that you'll have plenty of it to boost towards an RI, destroy him with a shotgun blast, and then quickly dodge/boost away. Short bursts of boosting and ARS-slow-mo-aiming enables you to easily maintain some power in your suit.

Jim, perhaps it's the fault of Platinum that they did not explain these techniques or tricks to you. You might say that they should have had a better tutorial system.

If you and I play chess for a dozen games, and each game I refuse to move my Queen, am I playing the game wrong? Well, in a way, yes. I'm ignorantly using my pieces and using inappropriate tactics, tactics that are displayed to be inappropriate by repeated, swift demises. Each time you died, did you ever think, "Maybe I should try something different?"

Jim, yes, you were playing the game wrong. You treated it like a Gears of War cover shooter, you had your own preconceived notions about the boost mechanics - "Any thoughts you had of sliding toward an enemy, murdering him in a flurry of punches, and deftly sliding away like an awesome space ninja better be abolished from your head" - and when they did not allow those preconceived notions to manifest themselves, you quite immaturely dismissed that there could be more appropriate tactics to be discovered.

Jim, you didn't like the game. That's fine. But as a video game journalist that has the direct power to affect the sales of this title - and thus the livelihoods of those who made it - you'd damn well better make sure that you give a game an honest shot, and that your critiques of a game's design mechanics are actually valid. You didn't do that. Based on one line alone - "the assault rifle is the only useful weapon anyway" - we can all see that you did not do that.

This is like you took a hundred-year-old bottle of tequila, and wrote a review of it. But instead of thoughtfully SIPPING it and enjoying it, you sprinkled salt all over a whore's back, licked it off, bit off a big chunk of lime, and downed a shot of it like a frat boy - and then wrote a lengthy review saying "Not worth the price, tasted the same as any other tequila."

Jim sometimes you write very insightful, scathing articles that point out that video game journalists need to MAN UP and actually act like they are professionals. I enjoy those articles. Unfortunately, your review here stank of the exact same unprofessionalism that you so frequently lambaste.

No one's ego is hurt here by the notion that you didn't like the game. We are frustrated and saddened that you have become the exact kind of games journalist that we - and you yourself - despise: one who doesn't take his job seriously. Please try doing that next time.

^ Then, he/she was never heard from again...

I too was disappointed with the length of the game, but everything else felt pretty solid. Not particularly worth $60, but definitely more around the $40-50 range.

I enjoyed the mechanics quite a bit. Gimmick was the name of the game, but I felt it utilized it for the most part. Not too hard either, especially when you consider games are meant to be beaten. I won't comment on the content of the review, though I definitely hope anyone who read this at least plays(and buys or rents) the game to the end to decide for themselves what it's worth.

I still don't understand why the back of the box art says bloody terrific.

"So what does this mean for the overall game? It means that, when you get down to it, Vanquish is just another cover shooter with shallow gimmicks that have no applicable use."

This is where you make your first FACTUAL mistake, Jim.
You see, your opinion of the game, that it's 'mediocre' is fine, you mistake, whatever. But misinforming people with this tripe? You should feel ashamed. Because you're as bad as Yahtzee. You're as unfunny and lack as much depth and understanding, the really basic shit necessary for a review.

You fail to realize that, not once, in Vanquish do you *have to* use cover.
Not once in Vanquish is the energy bar unfair.
Not once are you limited by the energy bar in Vanquish that you have to fall back to calling it a cover shooter.

"Let's throw a stupid amount of crap at players and pretend that we made a challenging game." Nope. Argus robot has the ability, that is clearly outlined, to one hit kill you. So does Crystal Viper. If either of them killed you, you duped yourself.

You don't know the meaning of tedium if you think Vanquish is cheap.
I bet your incompetent ass didn't even play the game on God Hard difficulty.
Too hard, bub? Play it on casual auto. Absolute pitiful tripe, maybe once you get the facts straight, then and only then, can you begin to write proper reviews.

Get your act together and stop staining other people's work with your misinformation.