To say that the end-game argument is irrelevant would be incorrect. To fix your statement, you should change your phrasing to "these arguments are unfounded and mere speculation"-- unless, of course, you were Yoshi-P or the dev. team. The topics of end-game content and the long-run success of the game couldn't be any more interrelated. To disagree with this is unintelligible. I have seen you make this claim in these forums before (that the end-game argument is irrelevant) and I could not disagree with you any more.
Also, how could you possibly guarantee that there is going to be a "decent amount of endgame content at release"? You can't. In fact, that paragraph of yours directly contradicts your first paragraph in that post. More-so it would be reasonable to assume that there would be a decent amount of end-game content.
"To fix your statement," really? Seriously, where do people like you come from?
You would get ******* slapped in about 10 seconds if you ever said something like that in real life. What are you going to do though, internet tough guys, meh.
I made the statement there will be endgame content because Yoshi has delivered on everything he's said so far. When someone backs up their word time and time again, you tend to give them the benefit of the doubt. You on the other hand, come onto a fan site and can't wait to start **** with people who are saying good things about the game... Next perhaps you need to think a bit more before you open your mouth. I said the conversation is irrelevant, which it is, because there will either be endgame content or there won't. Naysaying before we even know the result makes absolutely no sense, an exercise in futility.
Let's see... what other drivel do you have for me...
To even call this article a review is painful for me for several reasons. But because the technical definition of a review it cannot be argued that it isn't. The site itself is in beta and I have never seen it before-- it's lacking in reputability. The author's only credential is being an "avid gamer for years". He, the author, even admits that he only played the game for an estimated 8-10 hours. This is in no way an adequate amount of time to spend playing this game to give a review, especially a rating. It's astonishing that anyone would even give this review any credit whatsoever.
And the credentials of a writer at a corporate gaming magazine are??? Oh that's right, I forgot the guy who is just a fan of video games is clearly less qualified to right an unbiased review than the corporate reviewers who give ratings based on advertising and corporate partnerships.
So please, I'll give you the same advice I gave to your other account... Troll on trolly, troll the f on.