"Fair review of the product".
Maybe so, although I am not sure I actually agree with it. The list of games and especially sims that went public half broken is endless...from small niche sims to big blockbuster MMO's with 100$ production cost. And there are many which became great games / sims nevertheless, because the devs and the community continued to support it, with sometimes massive improvement only some months after the initial "failed" release. Someone played the first months of EvE Online? Or Age of Conan, or even WoW? Or SH3, SH5, ROF, BoB WoV, and so on. Heck, I can remember the whining at the release of the original IL2 that it was "unplayable" on mid range and lower range machines! And see what it has become -- reference N°1 in WW2 combat simming.
The reviewer should know all this, and maybe he does. But then he should also know what a niche product this is, and that it's almost a miracle this console crazy world is getting a new serious WW2 combat sim AT ALL. He should be very careful what he is doing.
So yes, he can say truthfully what his first impressions are on this current day -- fair enough. But it would have been a lot smarter, and IMO more fairplay, to not give a score at the moment, but to wait instead until the planned revisit in 6 months.
That is what Eurogamers.fr has done, and I think that is a much better idea if you want to give the game a chance.....and the genre. Review yes, but no score until the devs have gotten their chance on fixing it.
http://www.eurogamer.fr/articles/tes...test445?page=3
Now Gamespot has done the damage and the score of 4/10 will run through the internet, hurting this sim, and ultimately the genre as a whole. Even if you score the game 8/10 in six months it's hard to take that back.
Not very smart !