🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sat, 8 Feb 1997 14:07:48 -0800, b...@best.com (Bryant Fong) wrote:

>In article <32FB4C...@ix.netcom.com>, gkwi...@ix.netcom.com says...
>> Homer Simpson wrote:
>> 
>> > Gord,  you're still confused (no offense) but that *ISN'T* the
>> > Gamecenter review.  The actual review was written by Hugh Falk and may
>> > be found, funnily enough, in the Reviews section. :)

>> improving. It was a balanced review. This GamerX wrote an alternative
>> review and ignored a great many things. Since the URL for the GamerX
>> review is also at Gamercenter I mentioned that it was a Gamercenter
>> review. It seems that there are two of them. One at Gamercenter/Reviews
>> and another at Gamecenter/Xperts. Oh well!
>
>Seems the regular GameCenter reviewer is smarter than the "Xpert"?

There is no "regular" Gamecenter reviewer, as far as I can tell.
Gamecenter employs several reviewers.  I suspect "GamerX" is not
actually a single individual but either a group effort or various
reviewers taking turns writing editorials under that pseudonym.  After
all, each game review receives a "GamerX Rating".

In any case, I think you guys are reading too much into the brief
article by GamerX on Diablo.  It seemed to me that it focused SOLELY
on the multiplayer implementation of the game, nothing more, nothing
less, and as such isn't a formal review at all.