Why?

 And go Mario go! 

Mario is comin' for ya Link!

New review on metacritic came in at 87!

http://www.gamealmighty.com/game-review/review/Super_Mario_Galaxy_review/2/

The first paragraph is enlightening:

"I'll be honest with you here: I prefer violent video games over all others. Over the years I've developed an almost inhuman taste for graphic, first-person shooters and horrifically brutal fighting games. For a long time, a good game to me meant that it was packed to the brim with bloody carnage and the ability to shoot a zombie in the face resulting in a shower of gore. Of course, play control was a factor (a little)."

Then he goes on to give a glowing review of the game, but then scores it an 8.7. I'm afraid that as more of these unknown sites try to get more attention, we will see more reviews like this.

just for the record, soul calibur deserves to be there... but tekeen doesn't

soul calibur >>>>>>> Tekken

 Games TM is a joke, just ignore them.  I looked at all there reviews and they rate games more then 30 points below average all the time, just be lucky they never did that to Mario.

Go Mario!!!

I clicked on this guy's review and kind of wished I hadn't wasted my time on it. The truly mindboggling thing was the 8 he gave the game on "creative design" and audio, after giving 9s and 10s on everything else. It just made no sense. How in the world can you score this game, of all games, the lowest on creative design? The design of the levels is simply mindboggling. If any game deserved a Spinal Tap 11 based on creativity, surely this game is it. I can almost see the slightly lower score for audio, if the lack of voice acting is a sticking point with you. I wouldn't score it badly, since the soundtrack is... wait for it, wait for it... out of this world, but I can at least see a rationale for it.

 But the lowest sub-score to be the one for "creative design?" Moronic review.

I read the 8.7 review, and it isn't bad really.

He calls it the best looking game on the system, yet he only gives is a 9 for visuals? The best looking game on the system is the very definition of what should qualify as a 10, he's basically taking a point off for the game being on a console that doesn't output HD, and that's incredibly stupid if you ask me. It's like taking a point off for every PS3/360 game because they still use the old fashioned controller that forces you to keep your hands uncomfortably together. He also praises the audio and creative control, probably the game's two strongest areas, but rates them both as 8.

There are things that aren't perfect with Galaxy, but that site is just trying to get attention by being the one to give it the lowest rating.

(edit: forget everything good I said about the previous site, I just realised they gave Galaxy the same rating as Mercury Meltdown. what a shitload of fuck.) 

GamesTM is a British magazine and a pretty good one as well, it doesn't dish out 10/10 a lot, which it shouldn't cos no game is perfect but Mario is pretty damn close

Mercury Meltdown was reviewed by a different person.  But you would think the site editor would correlate these two and see that it was ridiculous.