People wouldn't be nearly as up in arms if the "review" were well written and defensable, but had given the game a 1 or 2 our of 5.

People are pissed because this "reviewer" obviously hates the Wii, insults the system (and thereby its audience), and goes on to write a "review" that is so full of holes that it's painfully obvious that he neither cared to, nor wanted to review the game. Not only could he not be bothered to review it intelligently, even if he hated it, but he had to add in clear insults about one of the best looking Wii games looking no better than an N64 game.

Something tells me that he didn't think Halo 1 or 2 looked like an N64 game.

So really, opinions are one thing. Lying, and trying to tarnish a product because you hate the system are another thing entirely.

Imagine if Little Big Planet had been reviewed, and the reviewer said things like "I think this game would have been better on the Xbox 360. I didn't bother with the online. Controls suck, 'cause I really hate the PS3 controllers." 

...

I think the people who say the reviewer obviously hates the Wii actually need to follow the link and read the whole review.

Reviewer's points:

Pro:

• Aiming is good.
• Interface is customizable.

Cons:

• Graphics are great for Wii, not-so-great overall.
• Game is short--only 5 hours long.
• Ending is pretty much non-existent with no final boss fight.
• Melee controls are bad.
• All-Seeing-Eye is annoying.

As a whole it's a fairly decent review that touches on gamemplay, length, controls, and visuals.  

The people screaming fanboy and Wii-hater here are projecting their own insecurities on this guy.  I mean, have you all gone so far off the fanboy deep end that you can't tell the difference between fair criticism from genuine Wii-hate?

have you even bothered to read the thread and the review?

He didt watch the cutscenes but complained about the story, He complained about the controlls but didnt bother to customize to see if it was better, He didnt bother to play online, he compared the game to 360/ps3 games and finally the gem of all he said the game was barely an improvement over Golden eye N64

Now you tell me if he even bothered to give the game a chance and if he doesnt hate the Wii and Nintendo and to top it all the review starts with that he blames Nintendo for making the Wii when it comes to the shortcomings of the game

... You haven't read the thread, have you? Be honest.

Of course I did.  I read entire threads no matter how much stupidity there is and respond to the parts I feel like.

That's very admirable, but then you should know that everyone's pissed off with him for contradicting himself several times and also pulling stupid jabs against both Nintendo and the Wii at every turn.

No you didn´t bother to read the thread neither the review, cause if you did you wouldnt have writtten what you did.

And this matters to me because...?  I only care about the review.  I don't give a flying fart about what he says anywhere else.  He can have a blog promoting the existence of little green men that run around anal probing Soriku for all I care as long as his reviews are informative.

I think the people who are trying to "Defend" the review miss the point entirely ...

The Conduit seems to be one of those games where you can justify almost any review score you want to because most of the game's content is pretty average, and most of what has been done well has been done better elsewhere. Now, this means that someone can see the game as being better than the sum of its parts and score it in the context of the Wii's line-up and justify a higher score, or they could see it as not having much to praise and score it in the context of all games on the market and justify a lower score.

This review didn't try to justify its score at all, and at times it reads like a "Fake" review you read on a forum from a fanboy who pretends to have played a hyped game in order to bash it.

To a certain extent this reminds me of the "First Review" of Eternal Darkness that was in a magazine nine months before the game released and was based on the playable demo and footage from E3. It was obvious to everyone how sloppy the "Reviewer" and magazine were because Eternal Darkness had been publicly delayed weeks before their magazine print date, and neither one bothered to look into why Nintendo hadn't sent them a review copy they just decided to "Teach Nintendo a lesson" ...

No, you care about what people are saying in the thread. That's why it matters to you. Also, the things I listed were all done within the review so it should matter regardless. It's not like he wrote it on his personal blog or something. It was right there.