It really could well be. I've noticed that many big releases these have embargoes. I've also noticed how many big titles are lacking too. I suppose the best way would be to discuss the game with someone who has an early sales copy.
The reason why the review came out early wasn't for some clickbait or malicious reason. It was a simple publication error.
I dint believe that for one second. A convenient excuse indeed. Anytime I search for games rumours and info, ibt, idigitaltimes, etc regurgitate the same bullshit stories about game speculation. It was click bait plain and simple, delude yourself into thinking that this is a credible review, even though to anyone who is capable of critical analysis will call bullshit on such pathetically written drivel that's presented as a review. Ibt has zero credibility, they have no integrity and what they present as journalism is an insult to anyone's intelligence. They broke the embargo on purpose, of course they did. Theyre a third rate publication that's desperate for attention. They completely ruined their credibility with developers, they probably won't get the chance to break too many more embargoes in future. I give Forbes more creedence and actually read their stuff and enjoy it, because it is actually informative, well written and totally objective. Whilst this "review" is a pathetic excuse for journalism. Says more about those who are desperate for it to be taken seriously.
Shut up! ITS PERFECT! PERFECT I TELL YOU! At lest this is what I am hearing from game "critics" right now.
Lot of people are complaining about the UI saying that its worse then Skyrim's. Seems like Beth didn't learn from Skyrim or realized something was wrong with their UI given the fact that the most popular mod on the Skyrim Nexus is a fix to their crappy UI.
Unless you got something substantial that proves otherwise, belief is all you've got. It does indeed look like this so-called IBT fiasco was a simple error. As another poster already pointed out, Beth extended the review embargo and these guys apparently missed that--having released the review on the original date intended, then immediately withdrawing it. By the way, Buxbaum666 is right.. you're way too eager over this shit. Do yourself a favor and scale it back some--you sound like a goddamned kook.
I don't think they extended the review embargo, AFAIK there was only an embargo on releasing the review embargo date.
It seems there are a large number of people that give it either a 10 or 0. Interesting if you ask me.
Two sides of the same coin. Both of them emotionally invested in their pursuit to save, or destroy. While this game is stupid, it is definitely not bellow 5 and not above 8.5, by the look of it.
Also to complete demolish the inane they did this on purpose for clickbait theory: <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/Siri_Support">@Siri_Support</a> Someone ignored my big EMBARGO tags on it and published it early for some reason. I don't have the power to publish/unpublish.</p>— Vincent Balestriere (@vbalestriere) <a href="https://twitter.com/vbalestriere/status/663036511445770241">November 7, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>