As more and more companies release games on multiple platforms on the same day I see more and more reviews comparing the games against each other. Is this really a fair practice? Shouldn't the reviews be based on the game and the gaming system alone?

For example, it would be totally unfair to compare graphics between the Wii and the PS3 but apparenly its totallyacceptable to compare graphics between the PC, PS3 and Xbox 360. Don't believe me, just check out the Dragon Age Origins or the Fallout 3 review.

Is it really fair to compare platform networking systems. Let face it Xbox has a long established network system compared to the PS3. So is it acceptable to compare the two when it comes to games. I don't think so, but apparently Gamespot does. The PS3 version of Borderlands was penalized for some network glitches it had on release.

Maybe I'm way off base here, but I just think its unfair and maybe a little bit lazy for the reviewers to be comparing games across multiple platforms.

Well its been a long time since I've been this excited over a game release. So excited in fact that I preordered the Collectors Edition of the game. I've never bought a collectors edition of anything before.

I hope its turns out to be as great an experience as Planescape Torment. I guess I really shouldn't worry since I can't remember the last time Bioware hasdisappointed me!!

I'm afraid I don't understand the point of Microsofts Games on Demand. Most of the games are listed at 39.99 (CND) and they take up valuable space on your hard drive.

Most of the games can be purchased new from places like Walmart for $9.99 - $19.99 or from eBay for under $20.00.

So why on earth would I spend two to three times the money on something that takes up seveal gigs of HD space?