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" ...
