A post to the Steam Users' Forums by Team 6's Ronnie Nelis calls out Eurogamer for its scathing review of Flatout 3: Chaos & Destruction, which gave the racing sequel a miniscule 1/10 ranking. Nelis calls the reviewer a "liar," saying the review was copied (thanks Joao). A subsequent post expands:

If you don't believe the text, check the screens: They don't show any deformation for example, someting that is present for quite some weeks now. There's only one reason how this is all possible: He is playing a non-official, old version of the game. It's not what people see when they purchase the game, thus not representive.

Also worth noticing: our publisher has only sent out review copies to the press as from today.. (so how could he have 'received' it earlier?)

I don't mind people complaining, giving feedback, or just disliking the game in general. I have plenty of positive and happy fanmail to cheer me up again after reading this article, but what bothers me is that he is not telling the truth. Shouldn't a reporter be fair and tell the truth?

If you are interested in fair reviews, i currenly recommend the one on gamespot. http://www.gamespot.com/flatout-3-ch...%3Bread-review

To make this comparision fair: This one is not positive neither, but the text is open-minded, fair and therefore better. The gamespot reporter also used an old version and not the official publisher-review copy which has been sent out only today BUT he did actually played and obviously enjoyed the game. Worth noticing: The two things he marks as "bad" are completely fixed nowadays. (too bad we can't get a re-review hehe)