A bare-bones run-of-the-mill 3D puzzle-actioner saturated with eye-bleeding color and overflowing with tired devices and clunky gameplay. [Sept 2005, p.56]

Takes the action-shooter genre and shoves it straight through the Blanderizer 6235 to ensure any sense of novelty possibly contained therein meets is brutal end. [May 2005, p.50]

The Lethal Alliance of uninspired third-person shooting and dull platforming elements pretty much dooms the newest Star Wars game. [Feb 2007, p.44]

Man, what a stinker. [Nov 2007, p.114]

Some decent ideas do fight there way to the surface. [Aug 2007, p.68]

A bare-bones run-of-the-mill 3D puzzle-actioner saturated with eye-bleeding color and overflowing with tired devices and clunky gameplay. [Sept 2005, p.56]

It just doesn't gel, with misshapen models, repetitive, bland music and a watered-down story that struggles to maintain a "thug-like" quality through forced profanity. [Sept 2005, p.56]

The game, however, also gleefully stomps over its source material when it allows these same tiny hobbits to impede the path of a huge and insanely powerful Balrog. [Jan 2006, p.53]

Some decent ideas do fight there way to the surface. [Aug 2007, p.68]

We're treated to slow-paced gameplay hindered by arbitrary rules - having to start every stage without your weapon, and being forced to sneak around the level to find it, is a huge contrivance. [Nov 2004, p.90]

Far too many key elements are poorly executed. [Nov 2004, p.87]

I kept waiting for a real adventure to unfold, but it never materialized. [Sept 2004, p.73]

Setting a game on the moon is a great idea, but even this setting is wasted. [Oct 2004, p.77]

Inconsistent AI, weak defense, lame freestyle moves - bottom line is the game is incredibly sloppy. [Dec 2003, p.98]

Takes the shallow one-on-one fighting action of its predecessor and repackages it with essentially no noteworthy enhancements to the fighting engine or visuals... Disappointing. [Dec 2003, p.82]

Budokai has style, but the substance is almost non-existent. [Nov 2003, p.92]

Just like in real life, the Corvettes on display possess wicked oversteer and, adding insult to injury, grace some of the most lackluster course designs I've ever traversed while good-'ol-boy rock and swanky sax music crackles in the background. [June 2004, p.61]

Instead of proceeding to that final stage, I was told to backtrack through the entire game, beat every minigame two more times, and then trudge all the way back. Sorry, but that's not fun - that's lazy desing and artifical lengthening through tedious repetition. [June 2004, p.72]

Though the doggie animation is realistic, the graphics are sub-first-gen quality, the first-person "Smellovision" view is misguided and the platforming always stays pretty basic. [Oct 2004, p.76]

I suppose MMBCC pulls off the light strategy it's attempting well enough, but I'm afraid that doesn't make it any more fun to play. [Jan 2004, p.76]

This isn't an awful game, just so average, rough and predictable at everything it does that you find yourself quickly ready to call it quits. [Sept 2003, p.81]

The play is slow, rubbery, and uneventful. [May 2003, p.62]

The graphics, though slick, lack the sort of interest I expected and are actually quite bland. [Feb 2002, p.62]

Exasperating mini-games; bad AI, camera jams, and a slap in the face story to any fan...This is not good...no--this is really not good. [Apr 2006, p.63]

xXx is so cookie-cutter action, it's actually sad... The 2D portions are just total crap. [Oct 2002, p.86]

The antiseptic chill of the game eventually takes its toll as well, finally sending this monotonous five hour experience into the deep freeze. [Mar 2003, p.65]

I hate to be the bearer of bad news for WWF fans, but Raw falls well short of expectations. [Apr 2002, p.62]

In a game that is billed as a "true filmic crossover," neither the story nor the play provide any pull, and their inability to work in tandem reveals the cracks even deeper. [Mar 2003, p.44]