Did Reviewers Screw Other games w/GTAIV?

[SaviorX]

Onyxmeth said:

I'm starting to prefer EGM's letter grading myself. It spells out vey easily where average is because we are all familiar with how a lettering system works.

As for GTAIV and other games, you really shouldn't think of all games being comparable. When a reviewer is reviewing Fable 2, it should be in comparison to other WRPGs and not an action adventure game like GTA IV. Even if GTA IV ended up with the better score in the end, it doesn't matter because it would mean GTA was the pinnacle of action adventure, and Fable 2 was the king of WRPGs. In the end though, this really shouldn't matter all that much. So what if GTA IV becomes the greatest reviewed game of all time and never loses the position? It doesn't mean one has to think the same way. I myself felt both Soul Calibur and Ocarina of Time were not 10s to me, but I understand how a reviewer could come to the conclusion they were worth it, and I undestand how they can come to it in GTA IV also.  

Yea, but they will always revert back to GTA4 is better, trust me. MGS4 could be a 12 and have nothing to do with GTA but they'll mention its 'lack of polish' or some junk.