For what it's worth... statistically 1 up is twice as negative on Nintendo games then it is 360 and PS3.

While IGN is right in the middle for all three consoles. So IGN should definitly be on that nuetral list.

At least when it comes to reviews.  Gamerankings is a great resource for that.

No. It's because real "hardcore" gamers who love gaming actually do buy more then one console per generation. (assuming the can afford it.) If they can. They get all three. That's what real gamers do... instead of console fanboys, or people that just like to play videogames.

Most people also don't say the Wii is a secondary console, they say if you've got a 360 or PS3 it makes more sense to get a wii as your second console, because the PS3 and 360 are going to have a lot of the same games... and real gamers would likely like the widest variety of games they could get.

The thing is... there isn't a majority of "hardcore" gamers. There hasn't been since the Atari came out. (Except possible briefly after the crash with the NES.) Most gamers are casual... and most of these gamers without broad tatstes who don't enjoy gaming as a whole and only some very narrow genres of games are mostly the ones threatened, because they're afraid the few genres they like are going away.

Picture how much the PS1 era must of sucked for you if you only liked 2-D platformers? There were many people who only liked 2-D games who complained 3-D would never work. Or the PS2 era if you liked any kind of platformer. Etc.

To me it seems that of the people who like a wide variety of games, most of the people have went through a couple transitions (have been playing since the Atari or before) appear to not think the Wii is destroying gaming... while those who came in, or started heavy gaming around the PS1, PS2 are freaking out because they arn't used to shifts in gaming.

Nothing annoys me more then people who claim to be "real" or "hardcore" gamers and you find out they refuse to buy more then one system or barely find time to play any games outside of FPS deathmatch, Madden or Smash brothers.  Or who even restrict themselves to a few genres and a few series in those genres and then profess themselves experts enough to dictate on what's proper for the whole industry.

A REAL gamer applauds any broadening of the market because that means their are more genres to play and more kinds of games to play. To someone who likes all genres(or at the very least most)... a new genre emerging is often times greater then the creation of a new triple A franchise... because new genres are much more rare and harder to come by. Even if they themselves don't enjoy the genre... because who knows where it might lead or how it might improve?

People who disagree arn't gamers. They are people who like some games and are insecure that they are too niche to matter... which is sad.

I know this as my favorite genre are SRPGS. A genre that is actually too niche to matter. Yet there are still plenty of SRPG games out there despite the fact that SRPGs usually struggle to get to 500K.

Gamespot is one of the worst sites when it comes to bias, which is one of the reasons I don't go there much anymore. It all started with the "graphics comparison" between the 360 and the PS3 for me, and I lost all faith in them completely.
I'm not sure what their stance on the Wii is, tbh, since I haven't really been there much the last year or so, but I do know that they act as if PC gaming is dead (like most sites of the same kind...).

1.  Just because you like Jaffe doesn't mean you hate Nintendo, it just means you acknowledge Jaffe is a character and people like him for whatever reason.  He speaks his mouth and when he speaks funny stuff comes out.  I think Jaffe is a funny guy, does that mean I hate Nintendo?
2. So they are critical of everybody?
3. Oh, so since they're reporting on gaming news they're biased?  I'd be more worried if they pick and choose their stories rather than report on everything.
4. I'm sorry, but if you can't see how ridiculous those patents are, then you're crazy.  I'm sure they could be made into something cool, but that doesn't change the fact they're funny and deserve to laughed at. 
5. So since someone doesn't like Wii Fit they hate Nintendo?  I don't like Halo, does that mean I hate the 360?
6. I think you took that story too seriously.  Are you telling me that you wouldn't be annoyed when you have a game you've been waiting for a long time that had the promise of true online play and you couldn't take advantage of it?  If you actually look through the site, you'll notice they actually do a lot of praising of SSBB too, how can that be if they're anti Nintendo?
7. Once again, link please.  I would love to see the context rather than you explaining it.
8. Um, as far as I remember they loved Mario Galaxy and Twilight Princess.  Also, it's a good thing when a news source doesn't just go with the flow and actually say what they think.
9. No, that's just their community.  Is VGChartz pro Wii or is its community pro Wii?

I think your biggest problem is that you take any attack on Nintendo way too personally.  For some odd reason you think that since they like Jaffe or because they mock funny patents that they are for some reason biased.  Furthermore, you think that since they comment on gaming news, they're even more biased. 

Please let me just set this straight: all that doesn't mean they're biased.

If they chose to just highlight negative Wii stories and then positive, say, PS3 stories.  That would be biased. 

 Oh, and nice research.  According to you Kotaku would be the following:

Pro Wii Biased:
Right Now Bashcraft Doesn't Hate Wii Fit
Rock Band confirmed for Wii and European Launch (it focuses more on the Wii than the EU launch date, OMG Wii bias!)
Club Nintendo Zelda Statue is a False Idol (talks about the awesome statue and the insane amount of points it takes to get).
Does Super Smash Bros Brawl Actually Deliver? Yes, according to the article.
Super Smash Bros in the House Not much of an article but sure seems like he's excited.  Why would he be excited for something he hates?
No More Heroes Could Have Rocked the 360's World Sure, it talks about how NMH could have went to the 360 but also goes on to compliment NMH.
Jaffe: Here's My Godddamn Wii Controller Bitches

Kotaku Nintendo bias confirmed. 

There are many factors at play here ...

First and foremost, the Wii and Nintendo DS represent change and a rejection of the status quo. Change is a wonderful thing for people who are marginalized or who have grown tired of the way things are, but those who benefit from the status quo and love the current state will become vocal and fight change.
The move towards expensive, high definition, media center videogame consoles as well as the higher priced, online, realistic and violent videogames alienates the vast majority of gamers who tend to still have standard definition televisions, no need for media center capabilities, have a limited entertainment budget, are not interested in online games, and favour fun game play over realistic graphics.

Now, the question is why do videogame magazines show such a bias against the Wii?

Videogame journalists today would be those that have been passionate about videogames for the past 10 to 20 years, and in most cases they represent the technophile, early adopter, “hard-core” gamer who is (often) more impressed by shiny graphics than solid game play. Basically, the journalists are the people who are most likely to feel like the Wii is taking away what they enjoy from the videogame industry.

>“hard-core” gamer who is (often) more impressed by shiny graphics than solid game play.

WORST misconception ever, that "hard-core" gamers don't care about gameplay. No idea where it comes from, it's just stupid everytime I hear it.

does Portal lack gameplay? How about Assassin Creed? Or Bio Shock? Halo 3? Uncharted?

Did I say they didn't care about gameplay? No, I said they were (oftem) more impressed by shiny graphics than solid game play.

Why do games produced by mediocre developers get hyped when the only thing we know about the game is it has pretty graphics?

 I would say the hard core gamer is more impressed by gameplay and the average joe gamer is easily swayed by hype and shiny graphics.

>Why do games produced by mediocre developers get hyped when the only thing we know about the game is it has pretty graphics?


Why ask such obvious question?

Let me list 3 of the probably a million reasons.

1. It's MUCH easier to advertise an item if it looks pretty, Same reason you see pretty people in commercials, you don't see butt-ugly freaks on tv as often as you do in real life. no? Deep down, we are all shallow.

2. expectation, it's thought that people that if a developer has the time and money to work on graphics, then they probably have the time and money to work on the gameplay

3.. play the ratio game, Most good looking games do indeed have good gameplay mechanics (sure, there are odd ones, like Lair), and you compare that with bad games with crappy graphics.

You will see that it's not hard to associate bad graphics with bad games.

Right now the industry is just bias towards the 360. It's not just Wii games that are getting shitted on, it's PS3 games as well. PS3 games are always underscored, and that probably won't change until the Wii puts these console wars to an end. A PS3 game can't buy a 9/10 score. Ratchet & Clank, Resistance, Uncharted, Virtua Fighter 5, and Ninja Gaiden Sigma are all exclusive that never touched 90% due to the hate against the PS3. Can you honestly tell me that none of those games are worth 90%? Bullshit, I say. If those games were on the 360, they would be at 90% easily.