Withywarlock

I don't think he likes dolphins.
 
 

I never played the game myself, but always wanted to. But after watching him play this, I think I'll pass. Angry video game nerd has steered me away from a lot of bad games. 😄 

I think Wolfenstein is a terrible example, it does a disservice to the cause it wants to preach. Yes I think especially the new colossus is very preachy.
The games doesn't take the nazi threat seriously, they are presented as extremely stupid almost infantile. This is a clear example of forgetting the past. The nazis weren't stupid, especially in the game since they won the war there.

It's very rough since the model was created through 3D reconstruction aka. photogrammetry using screenshots from the model viewer. If I could get my hands on the actual models from the game it would be much better.

The Walking Dead game series had a lot to do with human nature or their struggles with morality and against each other about as much if not more so than the zombies. Under certain circumstances, anyone can change and become 'the threat' to survivors whether in their own group or on the road. Trust, decision making, leadership, competence, integrity and morality and many other qualities are presented in the game. Even though it's just a game, it makes me think about those real behaviors in people and how they would act in crisis mode including my own self. We all think we are fully capable of handling situations but we never truly know. And it's weird to think about family and friends. Everything you know about them; how will they react with a group of people in a desperate survivor mode? 
Is someone very controlling who may want to dictate the group and not listen to everybody's input? Is someone a coward and throw you under the bus? Is someone immoral and may steal food, drugs, or supplies? Is someone a showoff who may murder to look tough? Is someone fearful and paranoid that may ultimately harm another first in false judgement? Is someone super quiet and self isolates from the group who creates distrust? Are you surrounded by man dogs that would take another's innocence? Or is there someone that you know you can count on? 

(Apologies in advance for what is a shieldwall of text. This is a topic I'm very passionate about. Skip to the bit in bold for a briefer version)
I think a lot of discussion about reviews falls into the trap of the "Just-World Fallacy", where in a just world reviewers:
Are given enough time to play a game to fully and confidently write their thoughts to a word count Are using a universal scoring system that can be unanimously be agreed upon as being "just right" (for instance, I hate out-of-10/100 scores including decimal points) Are having their reviews scored by an editor with consistent standards and transparent reviews criteria Are all going to make the same amount of money from a "First Impression" or "Review-in-Progress" versus a "Review" of varying degrees of completion In the case of Cyberpunk 2077, reviewers had to work with the following:
Two days before reviews could begin to be released. PC-only copies given to outlets with high end hardware A version of the game with a vague description of what its "Day Zero" patch entails, and no comments on what else will come in the "Day One" patch. Only being allowed to use pre-existing marketing materials lest they have future early review copies (and presumably ads) pulled. So while I don't think Kallie Plagge's review was particularly good because of the vaguery (focussing on what she felt rather than the object of her feelings), I can't put the entire fault at her feet when she's got 2 days to figure it all out. While her review could technically wait until it was more substantial, the rest of the games industry won't. That's where the above fallacy comes in to play. If Gamespot had delayed, their readers (and ad revenue) will find someone else who has reviewed it. It only takes one outlet/reviewer to have their thoughts up online to vacuum up all that monetisation and future readership.
I think of this dilemma as a similar scenario to worldwide nuclear disarmament, though video games obviously aren't as important - everyone agrees that nukes are bad, but no country wants to be the first to disarm theirs because that makes them an easy target for invasion or being blown up themselves, assuming they have anything worth exploiting in the first place (my country's greatest export, for example, is fish 'n' chips and crippling misery, so to any tinpot dictator I say "come and have a go if you think you're hard enough"). Likewise, everyone agrees that reviews should be done with as much knowledge and experience as possible, but no outlet wants to be in second place in releasing reviews. To quote Tallageda Nights, "if you ain't first, you're last."
--THAT BIT IN BOLD YOU MIGHT WANT TO SKIP TO BELOW--
But let's say for the sake of argument reviewers are given about a week or two to review a game, which judging by CP2077's length and breadth, is enough time to have some solid ideas on what it is and isn't, do they need to complete it? Yes and no.
Antoine de Saint-Exupery is quoted as saying "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." This applies to all kinds of fields of work, but literature especially. A review isn't finished when the game's 100% completed. A review's finished when the reader has no questions left at the end. I didn't need to play The Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance Tactics to completion to know it wasn't going to get any better, because I've played tactical RPGs long enough to recognise what I like and don't like about their fundamental mechanics. New Game+ wasn't going to make it any more palletable, and even if it did it wasn't worth suffering 15+ hours of dire gameplay to get there, but I still did because I wanted to maintain my integrity and--, OK, it was because I had nothing else better to do.
I'd even go as far as arguing that by completing a game one's thoughts of it may worsen. I hated God of War (2018) by the end of it not because it's mechanically or artistically bad, but I was loathe to pick it up after every session because it desperately needed curating/editing (ironic given the mess my post is turning out to be). To be bluntly honest, I think whatever it achieves is wasted as a video game and knowing what I do about it now, I'd sooner and gleefully see a TV show or movie about it. Bearing in mind that I don't have the stress that Kaillie Plagg does as Gamespot's Reviews Editor, looking at reviews day in, day out without playing much of the game themself to verify. I review a handful of games a month and write the odd editorial, and I'm practically my own boss - barring the spell-checking, code of conduct, scoring and general chat with my editor, I'm free to publish whatever I want whenever I want. I'm free of a lot of the stress and burnout that comes from full-time games journalism, and grateful there's not any freelancers in my area who want to take my corner.
--THE END OF THAT BIT IN BOLD YOU MIGHT WANT TO SKIP TO ABOVE--
So, in case the above waffled too much about the industry itself rather than practices (again, apologies for the passion. It's exciting to be part of a new forum!), here's the TL;DR: a reviewer should be given time by studios, publishers and editors to fully articulate their thoughts as accurately as they possibly can, whether or not they complete the game. I think reviewers should see all of the game and tinker with it enough to confidently speak on the subject, but there's sadly too much should and not enough shall.
Thank you for reading if you made it this far! xD

@m76 My finding of this site was exactly the same as yours. I just wanted to find another gaming forum to be a part of and.... here I, or rather we, are!

Contact your local hospital and see if the children's ward has any need for it. You could sell it locally or you could donate it to any place that will take it. You could also sell it on eBay or similar. Or just give it away to someone who wants it. I know that you want them to go to someone who will appreciate it, but recycling is also an option if you're not finding anything else you want to do with it that would at least let some of the raw materials go back to be used by people who will appreciate the new items made from the finite resources that can be salvaged from it.

Saving Private Hymen
Oh s##T! Think I'm taking this too far.

Breast of the Wild

Yep, that's Fartcry 4

Swallow of Mordor

I'm going up the ante by changing not one word, but one letter.
 
Mario Fart

This is a little game that's nothing more than a chance to be funny and creative. What to do is completely ruin a video game, movie, TV show or book by changing just one word from the title. 
 
I'll go first.

Please vote in the poll above. This is for marketing purposes. We would like to know age group(s) we need to advertise toward. A balanced community will be beneficial to everyone here at VGR.
Feel free to reply to this thread with your age if you wish. Make sure you vote in the poll no matter what. Kind discussion is welcome.

I have found this site through this article.
I don't think it is a particularly great article, but it listed some sites I didn't know of. And this was the most promising so I joined.