Very interesting article worth reading:

"When Simon Parkin published his review of Uncharted 3: Drake’s Deception at Eurogamer, a mild firestorm erupted, launching a contentious debate about the role of criticism during the review process. Parkin’s review took issue with the Uncharted design philosophy as a whole, but still awarded the game an 8/10 at the bottom of the page--a respectable score from an outlet as tough as Eurogamer!

Fans, developers, and even some writers wondered aloud whether Parkin had picked the appropriate venue for his examination of Naughty Dog’s choices. I wrote my own piece about the ensuing response, which prompted a more intimate conversation about the subject with game developer Manveer Heir, who is currently a senior designer on Mass Effect 3 at BioWare Montreal. Heir has been kicking around the industry for a while now, having landed at BioWare Montreal and the Mass Effect series after five years with Raven Software in Wisconsin, the home state of my dearest football rivals.

Heir is known for his outspoken nature, and isn’t one to walk away from a controversial subject. In fact, it was Heir that proposed we start a back-and-forth letter series about game reviews and publish it. I suggested we throw it up on Giant Bomb in its entirety, and he agreed. If you’re not familiar with Heir, you can read his dusty blog Design Rampage (which he promises to update), follow him on Twitter, scope this Kill Screen interview about his early years, or load up a Gamasutra interview about race. Take it away, Manveer. Note: This exchange took place over email, and I've done minimal editing to reflect the casual style."

Here is the wole 3 part article on the state of reviews and critiscm.

http://www.giantbomb.com/news/on-games-reviews-and-criticism-part-1/3912/

http://www.giantbomb.com/news/on-games-reviews-and-criticism-part-2/3915/

http://www.giantbomb.com/news/on-games-reviews-and-criticism-part-3/3918/

A good read indeed and an interesting discussion.

I personally think criticisms like those of Uncharted 3 can belong in a review. I consider a review to be one single viewpoint on the game, and every reviewer should tell the reader what worked for them and what didn't work.

EDIT: A reviewer knocking one game for something and not knocking a different game for it if both games do the same thing is something else though. That's more about the integrity of the reviewer than anything else, but in general, the reviewer should just cover the part of the game and describe what works and what doesn't. That way, good results should be had all around.

That's how I see things at the moment anyway.