I figured it out. The hardcore love toys and stories, casuals love games.

[Pyro as Bill]

Singleplayer "games" aren't games, they're toys.

There was no such thing as a singleplayer game before videotoys came along. Even jigsaws are better in multiplayer because it turns into a competition and competition is fun.

The games toy industry and their reviewers don't like competition and can't seem to be able to tell the difference betweeen a toy and a game. They would rather play by themselves.

Take a look at metacritc. You would be forgiven for thinking that reviewers purposely underscore multiplayer games or the multiplayer aspect whilst overscoring singleplayer toys. Compare critic score with VG sales charts and we see that it's games that sell, not toys.

Edge 10/10 reviews

The magazine has awarded a 10/10 score to fourteen games:

• Super Mario 64 (Nintendo 64) - E35 (1996)
• Gran Turismo (Sony PlayStation) - E55 (1997)
• The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (Nintendo 64) - E66 (1998)
• Halo: Combat Evolved (Xbox) - E105 (2001)
• Half-Life 2 (Windows PC) - E143 (2004)
• Halo 3 (Xbox 360) - E181 (2007)
• The Orange Box (Windows PC, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360) - E182 (2007)
• Super Mario Galaxy (Wii) - E183 (2007)
• Grand Theft Auto IV (PlayStation 3, Xbox 360) - E189 (2008)
• LittleBigPlanet (PlayStation 3) - E195 (2008)
• Bayonetta (PlayStation 3, Xbox 360) - E209 (2009)
• Super Mario Galaxy 2 (Wii) - E215 (2010)
• Rock Band 3 (PlayStation 3, Xbox 360) - E222 (2010)
• The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword (Wii) - E234 (2011)

All singleplayer. Ok not all but they only got 10s because of the singleplayer aspect. Rock Band and Halo may be exceptions but they're casual.

Not only are reviewers and developers unable to tell the difference between a toy and a game but they have the cheek to refer to 'casual' titles as being more like toys than 'real games'.