Would you be upset if VGChartz altered old review scores?

[dunno001]

I'm going to have to agree with those who say no changes to the main review, ever. As nazna said, if it's factually correct (which some "professional" reviewers can't even seem to get that right anymore), then it goes up to stay. It is an impression of the game, at the time it came out. A review of Wii Sports should reflect 2006, not 2010. Should Wii Sports be docked points now because of Wii Sports Resort? No, and if we'd be so fickle as to allow that, then it means our review scores would mean nothing. Conversely, does WSR being better mean that it must have a higher score than WS? Again, no, as there may be more intriguing things out by that time, indicating that the improvements to the game have not kept up with general improvements over time. That is what the difference in score should reflect. Feel free to say in the wording that you think WSR is better than WS, but also explain the score. This is part of how a good review is written- it is explainable.

I do also, however, like the idea of going back and posting an "updated" review for the times, but under no circumstance should this replace the original review. GameInformer, for all the crap in it, used to do this quite nicely. (It's a section that got axed in the revamping... *grumbles* ) However, I would wait at least 1 year before doing one of these, and should something merit a subsequent update, then the updates may replace each other, as they are only in reference to how the game fares to more modern standards.

So I guess in a nutshell, no, the original review should be stuck for good. If anything, replace "updated" reviews with more updated ones, and feel free to have it next to the original. I'd actually like to see what some people think about how a game ages, as that's something you really don't get to see at the current review sites... (And I think it would give an extra edge up to reading reviews at VGC...)