Good for you. I've been ignoring reviews more and more myself.

Well a 60-70 is an average score. I just got done playing Bionic Commando which got a 70. I had a blast but there were also a lot of problems with it. For example performence issues, cutscenes are crap, levels are unmemorable, boss fights are disappointing, etc.

I also enjoyed Two Worlds and Army 2. But I can't complain with their scores because they were very clunky games as well.

People rarely defend games that get a 10 - 40. I wonder why?

Those are some ambiguous exceptions to the rule, don't you think?

I have to say, I'm with Torillian here, take what you will from a review, however, to think that there is some unspoken, anti-Wii conspiracy is laughable. I don't mean to say that you are laughable, simply the idea of it all.

I stopped reading reviews in early 2007 when it became apparent I'm coming from the polar opposite perspective of most of the online gaming press.

Leo, Uncharted is a great game.

That said, it has nothing to do with how Wii games are treated.

And I'm of the opinion that "opinion" should only be a small part of the review score. Instead, quality, design, and gameplay should rule. "Reviewers" should keep their personal opinions to one paragraph.

What would be the purpose of reviews if everyone had, for the most part, identical reviews?

I can imagine it now: In Uncharted 2, Nathan Drake consists of 2 million pixels, a pallete of 200 colours were used during chapter four, and so on and so on (I have no idea - not really tech savvy in this regard). You press R1 to shoot.

The moment you say that the controls were tight, you'd be giving your impression.

Anyhow, it'd be impossible to review quality, design and gameplay devoid of opinion. Imagine discussing gameplay without opinion... it'd be no different than reading the instruction manuel!

OT: Hell, one of my favourite games this generation is Disgaea 3. I believe it generally recieved bad-somewhat good reviews. It's not at all inordinary to like something many people do not.

That was an awsome game.

Well GTA4 got 10s, and it was pretty much unplayable to me, so reviews aren'e always right, especially this gen.

I see where the "Wii gets bias" thing comes from - there were 3 fake reviews for The Conduit before it came out, along with that horrible Gamepro controversy (boy that was a HUGE day). Also, IGN had the wrong information when they did the COD: Modern Warfare Reflex review.

I prefer not to comment on the whole thing, but when I see something like this, I bring up my trusty ol' Naznatips post:

"People, maybe you can't tell cause you weren't there, but the mainstream gaming press hates Nintendo. It's not something grounded in logic. They complain about Nintendo not showing enough hardcore games, but when they do they complain about 3rd parties getting no attention. Nintendo fills their booth with half 3rd party and half 1st party games, and then the media complains that Nintendo didn't have enough good stuff of their own to show. They announce sequels to games that will NEVER sell as well as Wii series games, just for the Hardcore (SMG2, Metroid, Golden Sun), and people still complain.

As an all-platform gamer who just spent 4 days in a row with these people, allow me to present you with a shocking revelation: the press is biased."
http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?id=2266496

all this hatin lol.

i just recently bought a this-gen console and man i come here often just to read all this insane stuff. i remember when i had a nes and when my friend got a sega, it was a huge deal. id go over all the time and have fun, then my older brother picked one up...next we've got a ps1 and a friend has a n64 and everyone was happy, spending time at each other's houses enjoying each others games.
then the fun began, the series of tubes, the blogz, da forumz... da hatin'. my gamecube was the laughing stock of the internets, for it's kiddyness and all these whiny kids having to defend nintendo for being in last.
now this gen, all 3 console have ppl fighting about things, like how a reviewer would dare give god of war only a 9 and how another reviewer gave a game you enjoyed a 66 (average score). woh!! wait a second, you're telling me a reviewer gave a game an average score, and then you enjoyed it. holy toledos batman!! conspiracy man.
you enjoyed the game, hence, it was money well spent, hence, end of story. that's what i call a successful purchase of enjoyment. and think about it, you didn't even contract herpes while you were at it. (damn prostitutes)

point in case, a review is an evaluation, a critique of something. it involves OPINION. OPINION is very SUBJECTIVE. it means ME and YOU have DIFFERENT PERCEPTIONS on things.
secondly, video games has become a huge industry, an industry w/ too much money involved for one person to even be able to grasp the concept of. When that happens, the industry's perception and purpose become skewed, live with it. they're there for guidance, not for you to say ewww!! 6/10, that's disgusting, i'd rather go play with lint.

i predict: by gen #(next-gen). a reviewer will be killed, and not by a dinosaur stomping on him, but by a crazy kid who enjoyed the next frogger game that got a 5/10 by this so-called reviewer.

oo and btw this was not directed at the OP, as for you, i'm glad you're enjoying games others might look past. I for one do not even have time to play the "best" games of the yr, so i envy thou.

i know, FFCC and Indiana Jones are very fun