It's one thing to talk about how a game can come to be known as being 'overrated', but most of the time when we do so we're talking about general fan fervour and cultural reception - just try saying Ocarina of Time hasn't aged well, for example. But what of the titles that review so incredibly highly in the first place? With other respected artforms like film and music, chances are after you've spent time with a given property for a few months you're going to have a different opinion on it than when you first started - and this is also true of games. It's definitely a question that's prompted some extremely incendiary reactions when applied to the gaming press too; how much does pre-release hype and love for a genre/developer/art style influence a verdict? And is that increased tenfold when a reviewer gets their hands on something days or weeks before the rest of us? Many reviewers mention that the very point of them doing such a thing is so that certain readers identify with their particular tastes over time, seeking out specific reviewers for specific games to get the best information before a purchase. However it's still very rare that a score be altered or retracted after release, regardless of how much opinions can change thereafter. So we ask the question - which titles were showered with praise initially, only to fall apart when it comes to longevity? Are there any you got carried away with or had the rose-tinted glasses on when first playing?