As opposed to the folks around here who automatically give big name games a low score? At least PC Gamer has actually SEEN the game. (And yes, they do slam big name games. It doesn't happen much but that's what we should expect. The big money spent on big name games actually does get used to improve the game, you know.)
The objections that people have stated here might not based on actual game play, but they are informed by the (presumably correct) info bits dribbled out by Bioware itself. The things that I objected to are stated changes (not guesswork) over the way DA:O played . What I was hoping for was DA:O++ - which seemed quite reasonable for a sequel. I have said before that I think many of their design decisions were taken to allow rapid turnaround on DA2. i.e more about expediency than and true desire to move the genre forward with "unique" story telling. A moments thought will see this - pretty much everything related to "streamlining" guarantees/facilitates rapid turnaround (I include in this re-use of game assets, enemies/themes like the tedious darkspawn etc etc). As I said because there are simply not that many RPGs around, I'll probably end up buying it regardless - the one thing do commend them on is releasing a demo.
Oh, an the fact that PC Gamer have seen the game counts for little - Bioware pretty much gets a free pass, at least in all the mainstream print magazines I have seen here.