@mattwoahyeah: The tweet does seem ambiguous but if the final paragraph of this article is anything to go off:

"Rick and Morty will continue with Dan Harmon as showrunner, and voices are expected to be recast."

That would seem like Adult Swim calls the shots, as they're the ones making this thing, even if Roiland co-created it. AS is the one footing the bill for production/episode orders.

@crullja: Did Santa Monica ever actually say Ragnarok was meant to be the size of two games? Even that would be somewhat subjective. I feel like that's a rather ungenerous take to hold, especially considering the game is as good as it is. Not really sure what you mean by working your way up to GoW difficulty...did you complete a NG+ to loot up better? If so, doing that in Ragnarok would add a ton of time as well. I finished in roughly 42 hours and very little of that felt like filler or padding. Maybe play the game through 1-2 times and see how you feel knowing it's a duology and not a trilogy, which from what I can tell was the wish of Santa Monica, and a deliberate choice from the devs not to devote 5 more years on the Norse Saga. They're done telling this story, so I'd recommend trying to enjoy what's there (it's pretty good IMO)

@mgespin: New years thing, E3 thing, PAX thing, Games Done Quick thing, St Patrick's Day thing... really any occasion works here.

@climhazard5: This was the most reasonable internet rebuttal I've heard in a long time. Well done.

But yeah I love Kojima and his quirky, campy, melodramatic sensibilities. I think MGSV had the best gameplay but the tonal difference from the rest of the series wasn't very successful IMO. Overall I think 4 is the best experience that balances gameplay with story and payoff, but 3 is my personal favourite.

@RSM-HQ: As someone who's played the full series when they came out, I can say that ME1 isn't going to impress with the moment to moment shooting and RPG systems, but the world(s) building and lore and overall plot are really compelling, and taken as a whole trilogy, there's nothing quite like them. Despite the awkwardness of 1 (I think 2 and 3 play more like slightly simplistic but rather fun 3rd person shooters like Gears but less visceral), the series has well earned its reputation--I'm jealous of anyone getting to play them for the first time with this collection for sure.

@naomha1: Thank you for keeping up the good fight. You're holding your country together one delivery at a time.

@systemoverload: I think you're on the right track. Numeric values are somewhat antiquated and can give a poor 'snapshot' response in readers' minds. When you take the time to read some or all of the review or video, the actual opinion of the game becomes much more evident.

I like the video review format. It's simple and clean, and it's nice to check in with the reviewer in between gameplay clips.

I'm not sure if people realize that reviews are not a formula based approach. I can appreciate wanting to have objective criteria to structure a review around, but ultimately it's a reviewer's opinion to place whatever numeric value onto a game they want.

As for "No cons but still an 8?!" That's totally viable in review. The process doesn't start by giving each game a 10 and then working backward, nor does it start at a 1 and build up the more it does right. Something can have no discernible or major flaws and still just be a great-but-not-groundbreaking masterpiece.