You can imagine that the user score being lower is because of hating, but then you have to assume the haters merely counterbalance the fanboys who'll give their game of choice a 9.5+ without blinking
Interesting stuff. Part of what i saw out of that whole "Schick Adgate" controversy was that VGC Reviewers testified to being editorial pressure to lower their scores instead of raise them, indicating that we may have a relativley noncritical staff that's more easygoing about games even perhaps than would be professionally optimal (not that i'm trying to impugn anyone. I tend to overscore everything too, since my system is to start from a 9/10, then subtract what was wrong with the game, or add in the cases of games that really go above and beyond, to 10 which i consider timelessness)
Games that were user-rated higher seems to be almost exclusively games that relied heavily on the "fun factor" but had technical shortcomings, like how featureless the Mario All Star Collection was, or REMercenaries3D and its idiotic save system, but what (according to d21lewis) was a good game otherwise, or Epic Mickey with its jank camera but being, well, Epic Mickey
Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.
