Uh-huh, so what did Alex say that makes him an outlier? And why is that specific thing wrong?
But all you're doing is asserting it's negative without evidence. OK, I assert that it's positive without evidence. See how stupid this is?
How about if you believe that something is negative you give an example of why you think it's negative? I've asked this over and over, so far people have largely just stated objectively wrong things that I've literally just checked and verified are wrong.
So again this is just deflection and pivoting away from the point which is, provide some examples of why you think the review was "negative". I'm not interested in your personal emotional response and how you personally cope (or don't cope) with facts which you don't find palatable. That's just emotions occurring in your brain which have little or no relevance to the actual facts. You're confusing your own emotional reaction with the objective nature of the review. To be objectively negative in any way you'd have to have examples of where Alex was saying something verifiably incorrect, that makes the feature look bad where if he was honest it would look good. And so far no one has done that, people have tried but if what they're saying is wrong then the evidence doesn't support the claim.
I'm just asking for examples that support the claim, if what you're saying is true then this should not be hard.
ALL of the review sites regarding the 3080 launch (preview) were under strict NDAs about the specifics of what they could review, what games, what settings and what precise conditions. Those are conditions that Nvidia imposed on review sites if they wanted to get early access to the hardware in order to get reviews out for the launch day. DF are just being transparent about this to the end user so they have context for the review. It actually demonstrates open and honest engagement with users, they have zero control over the NDA Nvidia impose, they either agree or don't get early samples, the same as all other review sites.
Source?