This might be a situation where the ign reviewers might be making a mockery of this whole mess when it's really an effort to keep the slack off them... I gave the game a second chance this weekend... and the reason was this... When John Madden came out for PS3 and Xbox, IGN rightfully gave the Xbox 360 version a slightly higher score than the PS3 version because (as has been happening a lot with ports) the PS3 version suffered from a slight framerate drop. Last week IGN reviewed Dirt on the PS3 and gave it an 8.4. The PS3 version has been tweaked to have a smoother framerate and look a bit technically better than the 360 version (some developers take the time EA). Yet IGN gave it the same score. I know it's hard for people to believe this, but even paid professionals have biases, and people have agendas. These aren't all adults that always believe in the integrity of their journalism (if there is such a thing). A lot of them are geeks like us that bicker after hours about which is better Robotech or Transformers. The first thing when people hear this is "fanboy" but the logic behind those two reviews can't be denied. Why penalize the PS3 for a crappy framerate in one game but not the 360 when the same happens in reverse. The other thing that happened this weekend is that I received my copy of Game Informer, where Lair received a 7.5 and an 8 from two different reviewers. I realize that GI might be bias in another way "let's review all games GOOD so that people will go to Gamestop and buy them" but I have seen my share of bad reviews on there. Since I already own the game (and was planning on trading it in for Heavenly Sword) I decided "what the hell" and tried it out again. This time I really went through the tutorial and tried to get past the fact that I hated playing with motion sensing. A few hours later I had decided that this game was not going to be traded in. The fact is that the framerate is stuttery, but one thing that the sarcastic IGN reviewers don't get is that aside from waving a wand (that in 80% of the games doesn't work right) we aren't used to motion games (and not all games should have them), but given some practice, I found myself not only seriously enjoying lair, but thinking that if the option to play with the stick was offered, I swear to Primus that I would not use it. I really wasn't playing the game right. I was swinging left and right, fighting the controls (like on the Last Starfighter ), instead of using the abilities in the Tutorial to find and take out the enemies. I've already beat a couple of levels (much smoother now that I know how to play it), and the Story and Epic battles, as well as some of the insane graphics (that serpent boss with the water sliding off its scales looks Rendered CG) are simply amazing. The point it, the IGN reviewer will never take the time, because it goes against the principle of sticking to one's guns (ie. review). But if you look through this board, you will see that I really hated this game when I bought it, but now I plan on playing it until the end, and probably going through it again to unlock some of the combos and extras. Honestly, no one cares, especially in the advent of Halo 3, but for those of you guys like Primus who are curious about the game. Give it a rent, and go through every aspect of the tutorial first, no matter how tempted you are to just jump in to the game. It will make the game a helovalot better, and it will present a unique experience unlike any other, even on the Wii (you really start to feel like you are flying this thing, especially when you start ramming the enemy with a swipe of the controller) I would change my score from the initial 5 that I would have given it to a 7.5 or 8 that GI gave it, docking some points because the framerate still sucks sometimes, no matter how anyone looks at it.