Hello,
just to say that I've found the review pretty fair.
And for all the fanboys that think that these guys at Gamespot are biased, they still have their reviews for the previous IL2 series. Here are the grades and first line of comments :
IL2 Sturmovik :
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/il2st...-review&page=2
Grade : 9.2/10. IL-2 Sturmovik is destined to be a classic. This is one of those simulations that reminds you why you love the genre.
Forgotten Battles :
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/il2st...lt%3Btitle%3B5
Grade : 8.6 Forgotten Battles doesn't make the sort of huge impact that the original game did, but it's generally a very worthy successor.
Ace Expansion Pack :
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/il2st...%3Bread-review
Grade : 8.5 The list of minor flaws could go on and on, but its total length is minuscule compared to the massive number of excellent additions this expansion serves up.
IL2 1946 :
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/il2st...lt%3Btitle%3B2
Grade : 8.5 A combination of all the former IL-2 Sturmovik games and expansions, as well as new 1946 combat from an alternated ending to World War II.
Yeah, they sound like biaised reviewers, sure. They absolutely loved IL2 original and gave good grades and good reviews to the sequels even if the grade shrunk because of aging graphics. What they said on CloDo is just as fair and as accurate as to what the software deserves. And, BTW, they also conclude by : You better leave the plane in the hangar for maintenance AT THE MOMENT. The reviewer is expecting the game to become a decent software at the end.
I wouldn't call that a biased review.