I'm just trying to figure out why any poor review score is met with waves of people telling the reviewer he's full of shit or doesn't know what he's talking about.  Any time Uncharted 3 got an 8 or lower, there were people there harassing the reviewer for daring to criticise the game's stringent linearity or occasional technical glitches or lack of advancement.  When Gamespot gave Skyward Sword a 7.5 for it's repetition and reliance on motion controls, the internet went batshit insane.  When Duke Nukem came out to unanimously poor reviews, EVERYONE got criticized for daring to unanimously agree that the game had a lot of issues.  

Why is this?  a criticism is a criticism, if it ruins a game reviwer's enjoyment of the game, he really shouldn't say "Well everyone else gave it a high score so I must be full of shit."  This is peer pressure and it happens in game journalism all the time.  

If anyone was wondering who's to fault for the inherent belief that anything under an 8/10 is a bad score, it's the gamers who make reviewers scared to give a game a bad score even if he or she has good reasons for giving that bad score.  

Guess everyone is to use too high scores for everything.

Because Metacritic matters.

I disagree with this idea.  Fans of things are always going to want higher scores for the series and ranchises they love, it's a reviewer's job to nut up and tell the readers what they think even if the readers are going to whine about it.  So in my opinion the fault still lies with reviewers even if readers complain about anything below an 8.  In the end, they aren't the one writing the review.

Gamers today are the most entitled babies ever.

There, I said it.

They don't want lower review scores for their favorite games or a legitimate challenge in the games they play. They know that a game they're anticipating is the best game ever before they even get to play it, and they'll ruin you if you should so dare as to give it a sub-9.0 score. If you made the average "hardcore" gamer today play Magician Lord, they'd have a panic attack.

What about games that were universally hated, like Duke Nukem?  I remember seeing almost every review for that game (mine included) getting harassed for "jumping on the bandwagon of hate" in spite of the fact that almost everyone agreed it sucked.  

I also get a lot of complaints when I mention shoddy control schemes...apparently I should just deal with it :P 

Zelda SS gamespot review is one reason why some people get upset. if your so stupid that you can't play a game then you should let someone els do it.

Because a very vocal number of gamers who spend their time online are very immature, sadly.

A movie can get very different scores from different critics because it is accepted that a review is necessarily subjective to the reviewers taste. However, internet gaming trolls can't see that with game reviews, and they always demand a game to be reviewed by some super-objective standards (which are none other than their own subjective standards).

That's why I hate when someone says something like "it's unfair to review Uncharted for what it's not. It's not meant to be an open-world game you $%&%$". So what? It's the reviewer's taste, live with it. A movie reviewer that loves drama and high-quality acting is gonna give Avatar a shit score, but you don't see him getting bashed for 'not reviewing the movie for what it is'.

I don't know to be honest. I don't so much mind low scores as I do inflated high scores that are given in the face of glaring flaws and massive issues, as has become the norm of the 7th generation.
This gen is where I officially stopped reading reviews seriously at all.

If you can get through an entire game without getting the controls to work correctly doesn't that deserve a mention.  Call him an idiot if you want, but to me that says that the game does not make it obvious to everyone, and for his experience the score matches with what he played.  He should have done research to find out afterwards if he was doing it wrong, but I think going into a game with no predispositions is the best way to judge it because you can't assume that everyone who has issues is going to scour the internet to find out why.  If the game can't lead you to the correct answer and you need to look it up elsewhere, that's usually a fault with the game, particularly when it's a core mechanic like that and not just some puzzle you're finding difficult.