The second issue is the state of the game. That is the point of the review and the reviewer's comments seem as fair as anyone else's.
"I don't agree with your opinions, but I will fight to the death for your right to say them."
I think its pretty damn exemplary for them to say that the review of the game itself seemed fair. And while I'm enjoying NV myself, and disagree whole heartedly with RPS's review of the game, I think its nice to see some critical reviews of titles too often AAA titles are given a slide in the critical review department based entirely on the PR / size of the game (Lookin at you Fallout 3, with your numerous bugs and stupid AI problems everyone chose to ignore until NV was released.)
So regardless of my disagreement with RPS' assessment of the title, I think that perhaps journalism CAN be saved from simple 'go along with what everyone else is saying' mentality.
However RPS' direct attack on Obsidian was uncalled for, unprofessional, and downright mean.