I like reading the lower score reviews sometimes from less known sites, because you can see them point out things that others may have missed out on, and are worthy of having been a bigger complaint by those who praised it.
Jim Sterling does not do this. He makes shit up, makes vague and obtuse points, and sells it off as fact. 9/10 of his reviews are just like this Witcher 2 one if not worse.
If you can't come away from The Witcher 2 impressed, or at least know when to give props when props are due, then you suck at your fucking job or are just trolling like Jim is. For me when I played RDR I wasn't super impressed to name it GOTY like so many others did, but I GET what others saw. I GET why it is a game worth worthy of high scores and praise.
Guys like Jim and dickwads who make ? articles or "Console War is over, X console has won," just get right under my skin, because I bust my hump trying to do reviews with being constructive and thorough. I want to be able to back up my claims and offer some insight, and even if people agree with my scores or not I hope they at least can end up respecting my opinion enough to warrant reading other reviews in the future.
I could just skip that whole process and pull a HipHopGamer every few days to make a, "God of War 4 coming to Xbox 360?" Article, submit it to n4g.com, and watch the site I work on get tons of hits.
/rant.