I really liked this piece. I see how it could be argued as a little "loose" for a review, at least in terms of our site. On the other hand, I think the writing style appeals to me because it's a little different and flows like this "game." It works for me, for this game review.
I'm with Brad on ditching the Killzone 2 paragraph; maybe generalize the reference? Also on re-writing the final paragraph. It needs some more directed umph
); a channel to put your enthusiasm into specific words that summarize what you loved about the game, and why you think it's the best release of the year so far.
"How does that kind of person end up making videogames? Look at Todd Howard! Look at Ken Levine! Look at the media surrounding videogames, actively discouraging any game creator who shows the slightest semblance of personality! (Look at Kotaku!) How does someone like Keita Takahashi end up making videogames?"
Is one of those pieces that stands out as a good thought but jars from the rest of the review. I have those in my own writing -- the clever bits that I love, but get edited out during final reviews because they stand out. I'd cut this entirely, or at least drop it down to a sentence or two.
Otherwise, just a little bit of spit and polish to streamline, and you'd be good to go.
Kudos on getting all the details before and after the review, to fit our format.
If you are willing to make the edits Brad and I suggest, I'd approve this for publishing on our homepage.
On a personal note -- 12 hours? I thought about buying this game myself, but I wasn't sure if I'd play past an hour. Your review makes me want to try it now.
Also personally, I'd go with a headline title that plays on eating/combining chicken and people to tie in with your review; although that's just me.
Thanks, and I hope you'll write more in the future.