Golden Axe Reviews Are "Irresponsible" Rubbish, Says Reviewer

The editor in chief of Play magazine, Dave Halverson, has some harsh words for anyone who scored Sega's Golden Axe: Beast Rider below a 7 out of 10: "Be wary. The majority of these people (can't call them critics) either didn't complete a fraction of the game, don't understand game design, or just plain suck at games." At last check, all outlets but Play have reviewed the game well below Play's 9 out of 10 — the GameRankings average is currently at 44%. Halverson derides these "sad reviews" as an "ever pervasive sign of the times." In addition to the sarcastic double-quoting of words like "press" and "reviews," clearly indicating that both are naught but pale imitations of the real thing, Halverson says that the "review events" at which he thinks Golden Axe: Beast Rider was measured are an indication that of the "game industry going down the wrong path." He also complains that Beast Rider's well below average scores "for the most part echo the opposite opinions of real gamers." We can't speak to the final quality of Golden Axe: Beast Rider yet, as our hands-on time with the title has been limited to time at the Leipzig Games Convention and a few hours with the retail build. (Fahey picked it up before the weekend.) Who out there has the game, has played it and either agrees or disagrees with Halverson's glowing review and subsequent rant? Dave Talks Golden Axe [Play]