difference in reviewers and gamers score in Wii and Xbox360/Ps3 games

[dark_gh0st_b0y]

Torillian said:

dark_gh0st_b0y said:
0/10 reviews occur mostly in IGN and gamespot, i think the gamer score on gamestats is taken from many sites, not just those two

i don't think they are affected that much, otherwise it would have been impossible for most Xbo360/Ps3 games to have a gamer score above 6/10

it happens on all 3 consoles, so it's somehow balanced

the point is that Wii reviews should be made according to average Wii owners view (because they are the ones who buy them), not hardcore Xbox360/Ps3 gamers hmhm, gamespot

IGN does a good job i am say, they are improving

And how do you know that these scores are the average of what all the users think instead of just the hardcore fans of the game?  How do you know that any of these people actually played the game?  You know nothing about these people or the criteria they used, all they did was slap a number on a game without having to give any kind of basis for it. 

You may hate how reviews score the games you like, but atleast they give reasons.  These user scores give you nothing.

if it was just hardcore fans of Killzone or Halo or GTA IV it would have been 10 for sure

i don't think users just waste their time to give feedback to games randomly, if they wouldn't have an opinion if it's good/bad they wouldn't bother to give scores or even write about the game, like they do on amazon.com and so on, of course these are just "if" no-one really knows, but at least gamer score is based on the opinion of more people

they just say how much the enjoyed the game, and personally i find the user reviews of 90% of the games very logical especially of GTA IV for example, much more logical than reviewers score