Well, I agree with Dann that you have to understand the reviewer, I honestly don't think there's any advertorial i.e. paid for grades in the 3dworld chart at Schonner suggests, but if you think of that chart with Dann's idea setting the context. 3D World to me do try to be fairly unbiased as a whole, I've seen tuts in there for just about any app you can think of.

Personal bias in a review is something you just can't help, for example, I've foudn modelling in many packages transfers well, I can model to a similar ability in max, maya, c4d, wings, XSI and hopefully soon blender and to some extent change my behaviour according to application. However when it comes to UV mapping max and maya are ahead of the others in my current world - I say current because I haven't even tried in blender or XSI yet, I'm on a try out with those two. As fr creating materials, I find Max the best of all and c4d the worst (I'm ignoring wings and blender) trying to make clever composites or blends of material I find a nightmare in c4d, but a dream in Max - plain and simple because before I used max I'd used truspace and bryce, max was a completely different class of application to the others when I first got given it 6 years ago and I spent hours learning everything I could. Now I'm used to it, what was daunting is now familiar, it's all those other things which are confusing now.

So demo over, any review I do would probably show my inability to use the mat editor of the package compared to the one in max rather then what someone with a different experience may think.

----------

Toolset: Blender, GIMP, Indigo Render, LuxRender, TopMod, Knotplot, Ivy Gen, Plant Studio.