Thanks guys,,, take your timing giving it a 9.0 which is what I am sure you will be doing. No pressure.

Yeah the only thing is this isn't an online only game so it's no different than any other shooter that you didn't wait to post a review for.

People want reviews before release for obvious reasons but I guess it doesn't matter as long as you can cancel your pre-order, which I've never done.

So I'm wondering if you do end up canceling ON THE DAY OF OR AFTER RELEASE do they give your pre-order cash back? Because if not then this sucks but if they do then waiting can be good.

Wait, you'd rather be responsible and wait?  Why not just give it a ridiculously high or low score to get site hits from Metacritic?  Sometimes I just don't get you guys...

Eh, Adam Sessler already reviewed and didn't mention any issues with the Multiplayer and highlighted as one of the big pros for the game.

I'm not getting it on release, so this will give me a chance to read some reviews before getting it Friday

WOW; why am I really NOT surprised?!?! You guys gave the same lame excuse when you held off on your God of War Ascension review last week... I swear my post on that story (http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2013/03/08/where-is-our-god-of-war-review.aspx) was 100% spot on. For established IP AAA titles you guys wait until we all spend our money, whether the game is good, bad, or mediocre, then post a review. I swear you guys are losing my respect a little more with each title release! In a month that has seen weekly releases of a perfectly revitalized Lara Croft, Kratos' less than triumphant (but still fun) return, now a Marcus Fenix-less Gears..., and soon another snoozer Army of Two game as well as a likely PERFECT 10 for the much hyped and even more delayed BioShock Infinite; you guys are supposed to be guiding us instead of being so tight lipped. I would not likely have paid $60 on day one for God of War Ascension if I knew beforehand it did not have the "must play" feel of any of it's predecessors. So, as the teet of these BIG corporations keeps you all fed and at the same time keeps you from DOING YOUR JOB, I suppose we'll sit and wait for the 8.5 we know you'll assign this game. "It may have problems online like SimCity..." Jeez guys, that's the worst excuse to date!!!

Enough of the excuses about the reviews. You don't hear other publications telling people sorry for not reporting the news on abc but xy and z were stopping us. Yuck.

But killzone 3 got a 9, and the multiplayer was basically unplayable. I though mp doesn't matter?

It's nice to see so many "fans" are complaining about how bias GI is. If you think that they're bias then why do you keep coming to this site?

Why are they waiting? We all know that they're going to give the new Gears a 9 or higher, as well as a Gold Game of the Month sticker. I'm not saying that the new Gear won't deserve a 9 or higher, but GameInformer is pretty consistent with titles like this. And frankly, I found Gears 2&3 SP a lot more appealing than the MP, but that's just me.

I'll be honest, just post the review when you feel its ready. I personally dont need this whole "here is why we dont have a review yet". I can wait to have a worthwhile review and usually know why i need to.

I always appreciate someone taking their time and making sure everything is running as it should be over posting a review as quick as possible. GI rules :)

*Shrugs* Seems legit.

A rocky multiplier launch from a Gears game say it ain't so. You think they would have learned from their mistakes launching Gears 2.... and 3.

As much as I hate this franchise, I hope Judgement sells well.

Cool. I just hope that this isn't a trend for reviews to come. I need to know if a game is good the day it comes out!

This is why i trust GI reviews above all others, seems like IGN and Kotaku have gotten bad.

Gameinformer,

i really respect and honor this stance you're taking, great job. bravo, bravo, bravo. think my wallet is opening back up to gamestop

Hm...I understand this is meant to make the review fair and all..but how many other games have had terrible multiplayer (at least in the beginning) and have had reviews praising/bashing it anyway, either giving unfair reviews because of that, or just completely ignoring the multiplayer portions all together? Besides, it's Gears, it's at the point where people will play anything with that name on it, because apparently they like being lied to about things as simple as dedicated servers and proper balancing.