Its really tragic. I still read Gamespot as my primary source of gaming information while its become very clear that I am part of a rapidly shrinking demographic.

The Fallout: New Vegas issue simply leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. Not because of the score mind you.

Fallout is one of the bigger games to be released in the Chrismas lead-up, its a title that follows up one that sold millions of copies and was generally well rececived by reviewers and gamers alike,

Yet the review is posted the day after its released, really?

The 7.5 score is actually something that I need to credit Gamespot for, because the game is buggy and that needs to be reflected. I hate nothing more then when a reviewer glosses over some major technical issues simply because they are a fan of the content, I found IGN's review to be just that.

What really does bother me however is that that score will stand even after the patches are applied.

This is one aspect of the reviewing system that simply frustrates me to no end. Games like Merc's 2 will forever be tagged a 5.0 based on a pre-release unpatched version of the game which no one will ever play. Don't get me wrong, Merc's 2 even post patched is no better then a 7-ish at best, but its still tragic that there is no hindsight here.

Is Fallout: New Vegas a 7.5?

Pre-Patch, yes.

Is it a 7.5 Post-Patch.

I don't know, and the reality is that none of us will know.

If I were to float a suggestion to the powers that be that will never read my blog, perhaps a second look at some of the more anticipated titles post patch may be worthwhile?