The title caused the problem. Then the amount of text. Generally people are attracted by a thread title that might cause controversy but when a long wall of text appears their general interest disappears and assumption sets in. As you have written something that makes sense maybe your title could have been worded different. Yes , you would have gotten less views but the views you would have gotten would probably have meant people had read the whole post.

That's why I put that there. Even if you didn't mean it, the wording you used implied that. Yet I'll just call it a wash here.

Yet you're right about the flagship titles. Even though the GC wasn't tearing up the charts, their flagship titles were. So it would be risky to mess with one of the few things that still worked for them.

So Nintendo seems to be taking it a few steps at a time. Twilight Princess simply had waggle controls, Phantom Hourglass has further control changes (and was designed from the ground up for the DS), and the next Zelda would likely embrace Nintendo's new gameplay philosophy.

Well, the problem with this system, is it caters to the stupid. I don't think we need an overly complicated system to score a piece of entreatment that cost $40-$60, to the level where we are pretty much just telling you what to play.

I think most people who play games know what they like, and know how much they will like a game based on a review and what kind of game it is. So if I kind of like baseball games, and one gets a 9.5, yet I love FPS's and one gets a 8.7, I know I am going to most likely like the FPS better. No one needs to make a system to tell me this.

For example, when GTA got a 10, everyone with SMG didn't think "Well, is scored higher then SMG, and I love that game, so I must go get an HD console and buy this game!" No, they realized the audience it's for, the kind of game it was, and made there own individual assessment.

They are just games, and before the internet, you had to find someone who played the game, so you could ask "So, did you like it". Websites are just giving you the ability to find that guy in the same place every time.

If you want my advice, I would say stop over-thinking this, and just go enjoy some games. It is an entertainment industry after all :) 

"If you want my advice, I would say stop over-thinking this, and just go enjoy some games. It is an entertainment industry after all :)"

You know, it's years too late for people to just enjoy their things.

The system(I'm assuming you're referring to the Wii Review Channel) caters to anyone with an interest. It works just as well for the people who enjoy wii sports as the people who enjoy GTA and the people who enjoy Mario Kart and the people who enjoy Halo.
If you're talking about the Grade w/ timestamp method of rating, then what's your point? Ratings already cater to those stupid enough to think that a 10 actually makes it a perfect game even if it has flaws, and use those scores in attempt to show that Wii have lower quality games, and that one game is better than another despite obvious differences in focus.
Sorry, but if your customers are German, you write your menus in german, if your customers are american, you write them in english, if your customers are stupid, you write in stupid.  

So who has a chip on there shoulder? You thinking this right here, is why I started entering this thread in the first place. I have read all the reviews for GTA, and in none of them have I ever seen the word Wii. The only people threatened by GTA getting a 10, are Wii owners. (not saying all Wii owners, as I own a Wii :p). The rest of the world is just playing the game.

As for catering to the stupid, I meant people in general (with respect to your "Wii Review Channel" setup). I was meaning if you employed that system across all gaming, it would not tell the mildly intelligent anything they could not derive themselves. With that system, we would know that people who like fighting games would think SSBB is the best fighting game on the Wii. We know that. We would know that SandBox fans would find GTA4 the best Sandbox game ever made. We know that already. I never said anything about Wii games or owners. That chip is showing up again my friend.

What it would do however, is separate the scores in a manner where you don't feel threatened by a video game, and if that's what you need, then I am all for it. I just want everyone to be happy :).

And, Grey Acumen leaves.....

Can you guys re-lock this thread please? MontanaHatchet's first assessment was right, this is basically a troll thread with the intent of calling everyone who thinks GTA4 deserves a 10 stupid (as Grey's last post points out).

*1 - Nope sorry, that's YOUR thinking, not mine. I didn't refer to GTA IV and in actual fact, I had OoT, GTA IV, as well as any other 10 scored game grouped into that category when I mentioned it. I've consistently made no issues about the GTA IV, yet you are the one that constantly insists that I'm feeling threatened by it. For some confusing reason you also seem to think I'm talking about the reviewers when I'm mentioning people using the ratings to compare consoles.

*2 - Your assumption is again incorrect. Not all people who like sandbox games ONLY like sandbox games and not all people who like fighting games ONLY like fighting games. In the Wii review channel method, it is only games you have rated that are used to filter results of other people, if you have Wii sports, wii play, and wii fit rated high, then anyone else who has Wii fit, wii sports, and wii play rated high would show up when you looked for the rating of a game. However, they have to have PLAYED the game to be able to review it. Hence people that only stick to their own category of games and don't play anything else wouldn't show up.
So if rating Wii sports, Wii play, and wii fit highly and then looking at GTA IV, only people that have rated similarly to your ratings AND have also played GTA IV in order to rate it will show up. If you have also tried and rated, for instance, No More Heroes, and also rated it high, then people who rated wii sports, play, and fit high, but have rated No More Heroes low, will NOT show up.

*3 - As near as I could tell, we had stopped talking about GTA IV entirely and moved onto the rating system, as that was an actual main point in the OP. The original thread in which I came up with the idea for ratings was called the "Wii Review Channel" and then you lay claim to the idea that it is odd for me to mention the Wii in my argument. If 360 or PS3 had the type of diverse focus that the Wii had, I'd use them in the example. Yes, the chip is certainly showing up indeed.

*4 - The entire purpose of ratings is for people to have an idea of what games are worth purchasing. This differs from person to person. This isn't a matter of not feeling threatened, but to actually make ratings useful again. The only purpose have under their current setup is that of epenis waving. If that's your thing, fine, but don't act like its anything greater than that.

What the hell are you talking about? A) when the hell have I left? B) Who the hell cares if I do? I dunno about you, but I do kinda have a life outside of defending myself from you pathetic attempts to make me look like I have some kind of grudge against GTA IV.

Throughout the past 3 pages I have refuted every point you could throw out in detailed form and numerous people have backed up those facts. This post you've just made pretty much demonstrates that you have no purpose in this thread other than to twist words in an attempt to lock this thread so you don't have to feel threatened by your own imaginary attacks that are being made on your perfect little game. If it's as perfect as you claim, then go play it.

So you were also talking about a game you can buy on the Wii (OoT) when you said people use scores to show that the Wii has lower quality games?

Yea, I am buying that. You specifically stated in the thread title that you were referring to HD console userbase, and only one game that qualifies there has gotten a 10.

I hope when you talk, you are doing so to convince yourself of something, because you are convincing no one else. 

Shut up. He's not bashing GTA IV. You're bashing this thread.

He's just thinking review systems need work. Focus the argument on that.