I think you are missing the point. Why review a game that is free to play at all if it is free? I'm being accused of being a fanboy for shutting down IGN, but I never said they were wrong, just that they have ulterior motives for putting up a bad review. The spite that I'm getting in response to that is so defensive it's almost ironic - it's like all the COD fanboys think calling me a DUST fanboy bothers me in some way as a measure of prescriptive retaliation because I don't care about the IGN review. They give a lot of games more credit than they deserve.

For the most part, I don't go to reviewers to determine what games I want to buy, but I do stop in on the Angry Joe Show on YouTube from time to time to see if he's found a good one or two that I've missed. If the game is free, though, I don't see why it needs a review at all. The purpose of a review to me is a quick reference to determine whether or not it's worth spending money on.

I'm only saying I wouldn't put it past them. What I am noticing is that a great many people commenting in here are using the review as subjective validation for their own pre-determined hate of the game... and yet, you're all still here, commenting, as if you want it to be good. Or, maybe you've just got nothing better to do other than rant on about how much this game sucks instead of playing something you do like. Maybe everything sucks, and the only thing you're good at is complaining about it. I don't know, and I don't care, and I don't care about IGN.

I've made up my mind about DUST without needing reviews. I've decided that I like what it could be, and I'm sticking with it to see where it goes. Considering my EVE subscription helped pay for its development and it's completely free (paying for stuff is 100% optional, I don't care how you spin it otherwise, I haven't spent one cent on it yet), it's the least I can do. I like what it is and I like where it's heading, granted it has its flaws, many of them mentioned in this review, but also, many of the misconstrued or blown out of proportion with this idea that it can never be fixed and has no possibility for improvement.

Who knows, maybe it'll find a nice little niche when all the mainstream reviewers go away, and settle into a pattern of development just like EVE, and in its own time, take its own position amongst the top FPS titles as a serious contender. I'd like to see that. But I'm just an "EVE fanboy". What the hell would I know about an indy developer starting with a small buggy spaceship game with bad servers and lasting 10+ years including the beta to become the longest-living MMO ever with one of the best communities around?

Dude, you don't understand the meaning of the word paranoid. This is distrust of IGN based on my experience with IGN. It has nothing to do with EVE. I don't care if people disagree with my observations or experience, but the problem is people are missing my point, so they are disagreeing with something I'm not even saying. It's only their own failure to grasp that I have not said once that DUST is without fault and is a perfect game. I've never said that. I have no delusion about its current poor state. I just said, IGN aren't worth the credit that people give them. So stop raging at me.

Additionally, nobody likes people disagreeing with them. Same applies to you, as well, but without disagreement there is no dialectic. There is no "if you don't like disagreement, leave or HTFU", and I don't have to "HTFU" to stupid people who miss the point completely and get all defensive about me calling out IGN as bad reviewers and calling me a CCP fanboy even though I never once claimed that DUST is perfect in any way.

Personally, those people who want to call me a CCP fanboy and missing my point are starting to sound like IGN fanboys.

Here's the thing, and someone else nailed it on the head earlier, but I'm going to give it some more clarity. Just about every game of late that has had GREAT reviews that I've been a part of over the last few years has had poor player reception because it's been rushed into release: to name a few, Mass Effect 3, Halo Reach and Halo 4. Halo 4 was missing features that it shouldn't have been missing, but Reach had a beta and they should have known better. Mass Effect... hell, don't get me started. IGN gave ME3 a 9.5, almost perfect score. Tell me, what were they thinking?

Anyway, they're not the point here. The point is, the same thing is happening with DUST. DUST was slated for release LAST YEAR, but they are taking their time refining the features. Calling DUST "released" right now is just to satiate Sony's demand for a title release. But you can consider it released in the same way that EVE is released, which is also technically still in beta, after a fashion - always in development, always open to review and expansion.

And if you don't like where DUST is going, then you can leave or HTFU

And you are stupid, because even when I explained why distrust of someone based on your experience with them is not paranoia, you just go ahead and ignore it. I haven't had any "arguments" so far in the way you think they are. And the only person getting their "knickers in a twist" is the one who insists on arguing against a point I have not made, another indication of your stupidity. You seem to think I have some stake in what you think of me - I really don't. Go back to the COD forums if you want someone to give a ****. But I'm going to clarify this one more time for the sake of your tiny mind's ability to comprehend.

I never said DUST was perfect, but I wouldn't put too much stock in the IGN review. Unless you've already decided that anyone who says DUST is bad is cool and without fault themselves, and anyone who disagrees is a fanboy. This is called bias, the true mark of a fanboy. But I have no stake.

I don't have a "deep seated vendetta". Try interpreting what I said wrong again, it makes you sound more intelligent.

In case you couldn't tell, that was sarcasm.

No, your exact words were "deep seated vendetta". If there was another meaning, then you should have written it as it meant, not used terms that didn't mean what you meant them to mean. If you have interpreted a deep seated vendetta from what I have written, then you have interpreted me incorrectly. Parroting the words "fanboy" as some form of prescriptive retaliation cuz you think it will hurt my feelings or make me mad or whatever is just a generic way out of any actual counter-point to the actual point I was making. You keep calling me a fanboy. Tell me, where did I come across as a fanboy? Was it the part where I didn't take the IGN review lying down, or the part where I said that DUST and CCP can do no wrong?

Oh, but wait, I didn't do the latter, so who am I a fanboy of? Do you understand the definition of the word fanboy? You call me a fanboy because you think I'm sticking up for DUST against this review. That's not what I'm doing. I'm shunning the review, but I'm not sticking up for DUST. This is the assumption of a false dichotomy that you are on, that because I am disagreeing with the review then I MUST be defending DUST. But that's not what I'm doing. I have explained this repeatedly now, and you still insist on ignoring that and calling me a fanboy.

As for being rabid, I've never experienced more frothing at the mouth than that coming from anyone that throws the word fanboy around like it matters. I only care about the merits of the position that you take. If you are going to call me a fanboy, you better have a reason, and I can't think of one, so the only thing I can put it down to is you and your ilk dragging your COD-kiddie mentality into a big-boy's game and thinking you can get away with it because everyone will be just as stupid as you.