Two totally different games.

Well, Ign, the mainstream review source I trust the most, gave this game a 6.5. Bleh, guess I'll pass. It seems like a cool concept that was simply rushed to make launch. If Ubisoft put more time and care into it, it would have been a AAA game. Bummer, I really wanted a ground up Wii U game that really took advantage of the gamepad..

This sucks, I want a Wii U, but NSMB U is now literally the ONLY game out of the launch lineup that I want, and I can't bring myself to get a console just for ONE game. I don't even really care about Nintendo Land. Would have got Black Ops 2 had I not bought it for 360 because my friends playing online for that console. I was set to get Assassin's Creed 3 until my cousin said how lame it was. Already played Batman.. Maybe I'll just go back to getting AC3, as it did get good reviews.

I like and trust Gamespot overall, they have made some fuck ups like giving 6/10 to Mario Kart 64 but they also gave 8/10 to Godhand and Killer 7.

Yea, I've never held a cricket bat considering I live in USA but I would rather hold a baseball bat for defense.  A metal bat can do a lot of damage without ever breaking.  They should of had the start scene at the Little League World Series and you pick up a metal bat from there (too bad that wouldn't make sense considering the USA hosts the series)!

Well, what about when you're hitting already rotten flesh.

This game is getting really mixed reviews.  Unfortunately, that means I have to actually crack my copy open to decide for myself.  Hope I enjoy it... no going back now...

there will be a demo? even so a demo might be fun as it will only last for a short period which is ok but when you constantly have to kill Zombies with bat things do get boring

there where positive reactions to the demo but when people played the full game they got bored of batting Zombies all the time...

This has been posted earlier, I think, but Polygon's review: http://www.polygon.com/game/zombiu/2678 is really interesting. It gave it an 8. I trust Polygon and Destructoid the most, and they both had very positive things to say about the game.

Can somebody explain why the scores vary so much...? I feel like sometimes people are talking about two different games when I read these reviews.

Well...I mean...it all depends on how you feel about cricket bats, I think.

I think it's a combination of what Jim Sterling said about looking at the game through a certain lens and some people expecting the game to play like a L4D style shoot em up when you have to be more methodical and careful. In ZombiU from what I understand you're meant to avoid confrontation as much as you possibly can rather then run in gung ho into a horde of Zombies whether it means running, sneaking past them or even shooting a gas canister to clear a path to run past. Even just 3 to 4 Zombies can overwhelm you, it's also worth noting that your surviver improves over time, they become better at shooting and combat where as in the beginning they're quite clumsy referencing the fact that you're not a military train action.

A number of players who run in and get killed often will have problems with the combat as their survivor will never improve (your new survivor doesn't retain the improved attributes of the old), combat is there but not as a main goal, it's the overall surviving that's goal and this is what is conflicting people it seems.

Just found out this game has no online functionality whatsoever. I can't believe it. Third party games on a Nintendo console are still stuck in the 90's even now.