G4 isn't that great but they're still miles ahead of Game Damage. Even though it's really basic and idiot-proof TV it's still enjoyable and the presenters never feel like they're talking to 'real people' for the first time ever.

Whereas with Game Damage basically everyone that doesn't lick Yahtzee's balls thinks it is god awful and painful to watch. I wouldn't say they are above average when they are worse than pretty much every single presenter G4 has ever had.

Also in regards to reviewing in general, you either find them useful or you don't. That's it. Yes the vast majority of reviews are bullshit suck-up fests and are blatantly written by bribed journalists looking for more exclusives, and yes they never ever mention any of the problems or bugs or installation issues (in regards to PC games, especially lately), but I still find them useful. I tend to ignore the whole 'OMG THIS IS SO EXCELLENT 100% NO, 120%!!' comments and just look for what the game does differently. Seeing as I'm a PC gamer and I generally only play FPS/RTS games - which are probably the most heavily saturated markets on PC - it's useful just to see what each game does or doesn't do differently to every other game out there.

Yeah it's blatantly obvious what something like Command & Conquer or Call of Duty is gonna offer, but games like STALKER or Earth 2150 I would've completed skipped over if it wasn't for the reviews going on about their unique gameplay elements.


and dom: Shooting things in the leg? what are you talking about. There isn't a single enemy in the game which requires you to shoot it in the legs to kill it. If you played MORE than 5 minutes you'd realise the blowing off the limbs thing isn't a gimmick it's an actual feature that changes the combat pretty drastically (at least until you get a super high powered machine gun which is more effective than cutting off limbs)

what? it DOES? what is this....