I totally agree, and to play an RPG that way I think you miss alot of the richness and fun an RPG can provide.

I just tend to think thats the way completly new people will aproach Warhammer 3rd ed, butthen its likely not too much of an issue since most of the time gamers breed (as in create through inroduction) new gamers.

I have to agree. It's nice that he liked it, and nice that he is countering the previous "review", but this is only slightly more of a "review" than the previous one. Really, only the brief discussion about the GM advice section gives the readers any information about the game itself.

I know he meant well, and like the CEO of FFG said in his response, online reviewers don't get paid much (if anything) to review things. So, I don't expect a fully detailed in-depth review. But goodness, whether you like or dislike a game, at least try the game and give some specific information for your readers about what you liked or disliked. Just saying "I didn't try it but it looks like a boardgame" or "I played it and it was great" don't really mean anything to your readers.

I do review for Norwegian Hyperion, but I could write a hell of a better detailed review after only one read through. Both reviews, I find shaming for those putting only a decent effort in.

I think I should point out that the 2nd "review" is actually from a store owner in the talkback section of the site.

There is also another one by Joe Becke r (another store owner) and it shows his enthusiasm for the game (a fanboi now?)

So, most of the reviews I've seen from people keeping open minds has been positive. This has intrigued some of my friends who originally dismissed the game.