I have to wonder why people say things like "I'll wait for 'X' review" when it could easily be just as BS a review as the rest of them.
The best way to go about these things is to wait till someone you can trust can give you proper feedback.... there are enough people on VGC that will have bought the game early on, and will generally be able to answer any questions you have about the game if you ask them, unlike reviewers who for all we know were on a time limit and were not allowed to do things like sample ALL the options in the game.... I swear there are so many reviews where the reviewer hardly mentions key components, like perhaps online features... or even the difference between using Motion+ with it and not (that was an example by the way... there won't be many reviews doing that exact thing as M+ is not out yet)
I just checked the MetaCritic score of my game collection for the first time.... I have to wonder things like, why is Geometry Wars: Galaxies rated lower than GW Retro Evolved.... Galaxies gives you ~60 varying levels and a 2 player mode.... RE gives you just 1 level (with 2 modes). Perhaps they were thinking about price? ie you pay about 3 times as much for Galaxies if you pay it's full price, but there are 2 problems with that.... first, how does 3 times the price negate more points than what can be thought of as 60 times the content.... and second, why weren't they thinking of price when Wii Play was reviewed as a lowly 58, I mean Wii Play has more content than some of the mini-games from 3rd parties that achieve similar scores... yet it only costs about 1/4 of the price, if not less.
Or another thing... why BWii, SSX:Blur, and the Wiiware Dr. Mario are all around 70-75.... a score which is percieved by MetaCritic as "average".
