I don't understand how a game can get a treatise like this and yet only get 8.0 in the review, doesn't the subject matter and soul of a game demand points as much as anything? And shouldn't, by the same token, shallow boring rail shooters be marked down for exactly the opposite reason?
We are now in a different era of gaming, and we need more than ticking the boxes of 'good graphics', 'nice sounds', and 'decent gameplay'. To some degree Bioshock got extra points for it's 'soul', so tell me why Stalker didn't?! May be PC Zone can do another 'correction', like it did with GSC Gameworld's last game: 'Codename: Outbreak', where a few months after the intial review they printed a couple of paragraphs pointing out how the game was much better having played it more, that they were wrong in their first review and how they wanted to set the record straight. You did it with their last title, how about repeating it for STALKER? You know it makes sense!