The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Sony-sponsored Galaxy Review (possible spoilers)
AthenorWho needs lions when you have a battlecruiser?Registered Userregular
edit: People have a tendancy to not read more than the OP and post, so I'm reposting from below. I don't want to get in trouble for flame bait, so please keep this on topic.
This is one of the best cases I can see of a game review being paid for by a company. Now granted, usually it's the other way, paying for a favorable review. But this can't be good for the industry, can it?
And as was said, many of his points are defensible. So why does it need to be "sponsored?"
Edit2: Some notes. The "sponsored by Sony" part isn't showing up for some people now, although I've got confirmation from others that it was present last night. I've discovered (on page 2) that the "presented by Sony" thing is a header for a specific type of page, and can be applied to any review/article that Variety uses. This does not mean the article was published with or without the header, but more that it is a generic header and not specifically paying for the ad, only the category. It is a live ad, though.