And again it is confirmed every single person sees what he wants to see. The reviewer said he skipped time consuming quests, which is silly. It's impossible to know how big a portion of the game he actually played if the other reviewer (and they played the game simultaneously) did "explore the world a tad more" and ended up playing a couple hours more (and he, too, didn't play it all). It is clear as day they skipped most of the optional content simply because a) they weren't playing at home, b) they were time-constrained - the article has to be ready for print days before the mag's release. They can say all they want, but the truth of the matter is that if you want to immerse yourself in the world than it will take you much longer to complete. If you talk to everyone, read everything, experiment - don't worry. There are different factors, too. Difficulty setting. Saving / Loading ("I could have done it better -> load"). *REPLAYABILITY* (an entire act (or rather a version of it) is unavailable in a single playthrough). The "harsh" reviewer is hardly a hardcore RPG fan (which is blatantly obvious given his ME2 bias - which, by the way, was a *great* game in it's own right, albeit far from perfect) and things like this always affect the speed at which you complete a game. Upon reading the review (if you're blessed with the knowledge of the Polish language or trust one of the translations floating around) it becomes crystal clear that the reviewers did not tinker with the game and did not explore many of it's key mechanics and focused on playing the game "ASAP" - the things they concentrate on in the article are things obvious to anyone who played the game for a couple hours - general feel, graphics, sounds, music, combat mechanics, skill tree format, dialog system - and all of these on a very basic level, as if they were moving within the outer layer of the game. It felt like rather than dive deep inside they only rinsed their toes - which is to be expected given the little amount of time on their hands. If I'm wrong then they did a very poor job of expressing their opinions on the matter at hand - and I'm sure they did the best they could.