First off, a 5 doesn't ,mean average in today's review system. being that reviewers just toss around unnecessarily high scores these days.

With my system, if really fine tuned, there wouldn't even need to be a total aggregated score. But rather, scores on different categories that make up the game and which also happens to cover all aspects of a game either directly or indirectly. So under the gameplay section, the game mechanics for that specific title will be reviewed and scored. Then under emotion (it could be called anything), which covers story and music/sound design, the game will be accessed too, with considerations made to what kinda game it is, like a story focus won't be heavy on a game like Mario or a racing game unlike say an RPG or something. Basically, if a game tries to take itself seriously and waste gamers time weaving a story, then it better be a good one.

Basically, my system would mean that every game fundamentally gets scores for all the different categories. As opposed to one purely opinionated total score. This way, if a reviewer complains about spotty multiplayer, then we already know exactly how many points it would lose, if he further complains of sporadic broken frame rates, we know what the cost will be...etc 

Rather spectacularly missing the point, but it doesn't really matter.

I'm sure the system is great. And I'm sure you put a lot of thought into it. I, personally, think it is a pointlessly overcomplicated and unintuitive system designed to fix the wrong kind of problem, but I haven't seen it in action. Maybe it just works, somehow. By all means, try it out. 

I am on Wii VC? Better get that white sexy beast fired up again.

Not missing the point. It just happens to be that you are over simplifying things in an industry that is simply not simple. Yes, a 5 "should" represent average in a 10 point review system. But you'll have to be in denial if you say any review site adheres to that review doctrine. Majority of the games score above a 7. And because these reviewers don't follow any set review standards besides how a game "feels" which is mostly subjective the scores are all over the place and sometimes bias even plays into it.

We cannot expect game journalism to take their jobs seriously if we don't hold them accountable. They can't be held accountable if there isn't a fixed review standard. Fact is that a games review score affects how it sells. It even affects the bonuses studios get/don't get for their work on a game. Reviews are way too important in this industry to not be taken seriously. My system does just that. Breaks a game up into its core elements and reviews each one individually. 

Take a car for instance, when reviewing a car its also broken up into different categories. Performce, fuel economy, design, interior...etc. Or a phone, they talk about its design, hardware, OS, camera..etc. But with gaming we got one block opinionated piece that is mostly contradictory.