RE: Game Reviews - I didn't want to advertise a specific one, but I'm partial to Game Informer because of how in-depth the review typically is. I agree they tend to way over-hype Previews, which is exactly the case mentioned where they get to go to a private showing of the product and play it for a few minutes/hours or a level or so, but that is before the game itself is released. After the release, usually professional review sites are sent a copy of the game and it's reviewed in-office in order to meet with compliance. I've seen Game Informer overhype the hell out of a game during a preview, then rip it to shreds in reviews.
Ultimately, though, your best bet is to read several review publications on their reviews of games you've already played, and look for ones that more or less mirror your own thoughts on a game. I generally agree with the points GI makes, but I'm one person, of a certain personality, who enjoys certain game types, and has certain hangups about controls, graphics, etc. You, or anyone else, might have entirely different criteria you judge a game's worth by. So that's why I don't advertise them as "great reviewers," because they're only great for me, and people who think like me, and I still have to ignore their previews.
RE: MoO3 - thanks for the hemmorhaging memories of epic fail that that game turned out to be. You've given me more reason to be paranoid than before. The one and only cool think about MoO3 were those new parasite face-sucker guys, but a cool new species to play does NOT make up for the horrible game itself.
