Reviews aren't useless but if you treat them as gospel then you're in trouble. Reviews for games I find particularly challenging as the 'rules' are not clearly defined for the medium yet vs say film reviews.
Reading your post and the replies all I can say is:
1) reading a number of reviews this one seems harsh but there you go - I'd say the game sounds like a solid 70% let down by puzzle/combat issues and if you like the kind of experience it offers you'll certainly enjoy it
2) reviews are useful if treated correctly and compared with others - sometimes for me certain negative reviews = must buy while certain positive reviews = no thanks. That's because I understand what I like playing and evaluate reviews accordingly.
3) personal preferences do not equal universal truths - while technical aspects are universal, i.e. a buggy game is simply not as well made as one with no bugs, what gives you enjoyment is not. If I played a totally stable game whose gameplay I didn't like while I'd note it had no bugs I still wouldn't be enjoying myself. Conversely if I played a somewhat unstable game whose game
I have no issue with someone preferring AITD to MGS4 but anyone who does needs to realised that they haven't discovered some big truth - it just means that your personal preferences in this case put you in a minority. It's very unlikely more people will prefer AITD to MGS4 for example.
Likewise its probable a majority of gamers will be more irked by the glitches than you were.
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
