Well you have a number of problems with your argument. Not that I entirely disagree with you about them being idiots. Look, the game could have absolutely no "cons" listed and get an 8.7 out of 10. There are plenty of games I have that I don't have any major gripes about and would not give a perfect score. In fact, I would hardly give any game at all a perfect score, that's not how it works. So no, the 1.3 points off is not because of that one "con" that they list. Also, you have to realize that there is no logical way to compare two different reviewers opinions(yes, reviews are subjective and therefore opinion) of the same game. So stating that a review from over 10 years ago gave the original a 9.9 doesn't really hold any weight. I love the game, but I would say that an 8.7 is certainly a fair score anyhow. By no means is that a bad score. It is actually listed as "great" if I remember correctly.
Reviews are just subjective anyhow, so try not to get too caught up in the number score. More important is the actual meat of the review.
