- you have only one inventory for all members...
- only 6 food allowed?

Every single so called professional game review sounds this way to me now. Paragraph after paragraph of them pontificating over useless points and no real good information at all. I don't even read them anymore, for the most part I get most of my opinions of what to buy from the fine people on these forums.

I think I am going to get MMX when I have money, even if having uplay attached annoys me.

no 16:10 reso aspect ratio support what the hell :S

http://www.gog.com/forum/general/might_and_magic_x/post508

if I change it to 1680x1050 the ui goes crazy and cant click many things...no native reso supports = ui screwed.
we are in 2014 I'm not asking about dual monitors, awesome graphics or whatever just let me choose my native resolution without tweaking anything and screwing the game...
I'm going to ask for a refund this is ridiculous ...

- you can buy a pack horse as a follower and have additional inventory space
- later in game you can buy more

Crosmando is right in a way. Review looks like to be a summary to me. Too short.
I can't be the only one who likes reviews where u had the traditional Story,Graphics,Audio,Gameplay breakdowns with a bit more detail (AAA or otherwise). Not enough info for buyer to rely on.

Bullshit indeed. Non-native resolutions look like garbage so I'll wait to see if they patch it.

I'm not sure if it's bullshit really, the game definitely has signs of budgetitis (low-res textures & wooden animations here and there) and it's obvious the developers were really crunching the last few months to finish the game on time.

Also apparently much of the art was outsourced to a Ubisoft branch in China (obviously to save money), so that might have something to do with it.

http://www.joystiq.com/2014/01/24/might-and-magic-10-legacy-review-one-square-at-a-time/
Now you see, this is a decent review. It could of been longer and a bit more in-depth but it's more than just a summary. Yes he whines about the graphics at the end, but he's right that the graphics settings are kinda weird, and anti-aliasing doesn't seem to really do anything.

It's perfectly alright to disagree with them, but the way you phrase it, is as if you are implying that any opinion that doesn't align with the majority is not worth expressing. Why should their taste in games - or anyone else's for that matter - be dictated by 'what a community likes'?

Anyway, sorry for the off-topic post. I don't really like the idea of grid-based movement in an open world environment so I probably won't be playing this game anytime soon. Perhaps once the heavy discounts start rolling in.

I've had this argument so many times before and, basically, your point is very weak (why do people keep making this one anyway?) - they're PAID - it's their JOB- because their opinions are supposed to be professional, calculated and accurate making the review usable for the large majority of readers. John Walkers opinion is neither if you ask me. He will slam games that the community of that type of games loves and will do it while focusing on certain elements while ignoring much more important ones. If you think that doesn't make him a poor reviewer, any sod off the street can be one so why get paid for it?

No, we look towards these writers to present us with a well rounded look at a game with fair pros and cons that try to embrace most gamers. THAT is why John Walker fails - because I've always felt his reviews only embrace his own likes and he has some pretty peculiar pet likes and hates making him far from ideal for his job. The whole sexist angle he has been swinging around for the past year or so, is just one example of how he'll moan and slam a game for something most gamers don't really feel strongly about. Another is how he'll bitch about "poor translations" which, to the huge majority of people, would be just fine.

I dislike RPS as reviewers because they tend to be super hipster about shit. When they do their game of the year stuff they always apologize for liking mass market games, like it's some kind of stain on their website to admit they like Assassin's Creed. I find that attitude super annoying.

Yeah, I've felt that as well. I think that's why John Walker tends to want to be "different" - it's like he refuses to like the same stuff others like. RPS seems to attract those kind of writers and some earlier writers have left RPS, I think, because they no longer felt at home. I mean, older reviews often made silly jokes and goofed around and I liked that. Heck, he Oblivion review made a downright sexist joke! GASP! Then Walker apparently slammed his foot down and demanded to be more serious. Out went the silly jokes and in came the heaps of fanboyism, elitism and people on high horses thinking their shit doesn't smell.

The original PC Gamer (UK) was a bit of a lads magazine and had a lot of silly comedy and jokes and that's what drew me to it - the "PC" should never have shifted from "Personal computer" to "political correctness" and that's what it sadly has become ... and it became that because of the same writers who now write for RPS. Sterile and dull flat jokes that try not to offend anyone and as a result fail to be funny full stop. It's a shame - the same happened to all magazines. I used to read plenty of UK magazines on (mainly PC) games and I loved the dry wit, digs at other staff and famous people, the in-jokes and so on. That's all gone now - more proof that a corporate approach only deadens an industry.

Most mags seem to think it is a 70. The fans seem to like it. I guess it is ok, MM6 only got 60% in my mag of choice back then, but from the review text I knew I was going to love it.
Plus all the reviews seem to whine about is the graphics, but I think it looks much better than MM6. :D