There was another one up at Gamers Assault Weekly, which got a thread here--briefly. I mentioned several obvious blunders in the text that led one to think the author might not have actually played the game (or played it more than an hour), and the thread was pulled.

Really, there's no accounting for quality. Anybody with a little bit of site skill can start up a game blog/mag these days, and make it look professional. And few people really care about what's being written.

5/10 is a score is for games that are a disaster. The review doesn't read like a disaster, it reads like the reviewer wasn't pleased with the tutorial and swarm. The tutorial was actually pretty bad the last time I checked (at the beginning of the beta), but there is very little here about any negative experience of playing the game. I wonder if the reviewer thinks that swarm gives those surrounding units an extra attack? That would be crazy unbalanced, but it is not the case. Where is the disaster in this review?

There are a few other reviews up if you do a google search and look in the news. Gameranx gave it a 9/10, 411mania gave it 8/10, rtsguru gave it a 8/10, and I saw some other one with a 7.5/10. I don't know if and when these will make it to metacritic.

Gameranx review- http://www.gameranx.com/features/id/14851/article/fallen-enchantress-legendary-heroes-review/

HOMM3? Those are big words! Congratulations! Now, if only you could go for that extra point, it wold be AWESOME

Wow Thunderbolt gave it a 5. From reading the review it sounded like he was leaning toward a 7. Then bam he gives it a 5. The written review and the score have some disparity there.