Nah, I'm not sayin' that.  I'm just sayin' that this is the second time I feel like IGN gave a Wii game just under a 9.0 purposely.  Reading Charles' review made me think the game was gonna get a 9.0 or above for sure.  I was a little surprised by the score.  The other review was Craigs NSMBWii review where he bought up BS detractions to knock the score down from a 9.0.

Someone else said it but I'll say it again then, reviews don't matter.

Your either going to get the game or not.

People who base their purchase on someone elses opinion deserve what they get.

Reviews matter to me when I have to make a decision for which game I want to purchase. Games are expensive, especially here in Australia >_>, so of course I'm going to purchase the game that got the better reviews, and save the other for when the game has gone down in price.

Though there are times when I prefer the lower scored/cheaper game.

Looks tasty!

it looks so fun

Screw the reviews. though it wasn't bad.

I had more a problem swallowing some information on this game. I don't like that theres less weapons :/ especially the Dual Swords. While I don't use them(I lean towards Long Sword) I know that people do.

I'm also a bit miffed that the Local Co-Op. It's arena only and pre set gear :( total suckage. I don't know enough Wii players to warrent buying this game. sigh and just this morning I was so hyped.

I don't get it. It's the highest rating IGN has ever given Monster Hunter. How is that a "bad" score?  How does it show bias?  Maybe IGN is biased against the PSP/PS2 because the PSP versions scored 7.7-8.3, and the PS2 version scored 7.2.

EDIT:  Yakuzaice beat me to the punch.

looks like it was marked down for Loading times and steep learning curve mainly and also a few control annoyances no big deal