Eh? Boxing controls are fine. Most people who criticize them are just upset that their flailing doesn't translate into automatic victory. You actually have to box. Throwing three punches every second never won Cassius Clay any titles. Keep up a tight defense and exploit weaknesses in your enemy's guard and you can achieve a 2000+ rating. just like Doc says in Punch Out, "Dodge his punch, then counter-punch."

Tennis simply has the best controls of any of the Sports games, but most people can't figure out how important position relative to the ball is. They also fail to hold the wiimote in a neutral position where they can swing backhanded, which means when a player who hurriedly get his arm in position for a backhand, the game interprets it as a forehand swing. What's funny is the game doesn't care if you swing backhanded or forehanded, it just looks for the motion. However, if you lift the wiimote up while you swing, you'll lob the ball high. Swing down and the ball may not clear the net. Tennis is the easiest sport to get a 2000+ rating in.

Bowling is the most challenging, because you aren't competing against an opponent. You can't exploit their weaknesses, you have to work to achieve personal perfection. You have to achieve a consistant swing and position yourself so that your consistant swing gets strikes. I have a hard time keeping my swing consistant, so I hover around a 1k rating. My brother-in-law does have a consistant swing, and scores much better.

 Golf is the only sport that really has control issues, and it's mostly just putting, which is far too sensitive. There are tricks to putt effectively, but they completely break the immersion. Golf is a boring sport anyway. :P

Wii Sports is deeper than most people give it credit for.

 I never said you can win a lot of matches, but you can win a round here or there. Not against the best of the best of course, but people who are very good can get taken down by a button mashing Maxi. On the other hand I have yet to meet anyone who can beat me in Wii Sports. I take down everyone because I can play the game a lot better than them. Inarguably SC has more depth, but also less ways to recover from a bad situation. When you say the game has no depth and anyone just starting can be an expert it tells me you really haven't played the game much. Someone randomly swinging the tennis racket won't score a single point on me in tennis. I will simply have to hit the ball twice and it will land in a spot they simply can't get to because they played the game badly.

 If Resident Evil 4 was perfect, how can Resident Evil 4 Wii edition have better controls? What is the point in making Resident Evil 5 if the game has piqued and can no longer be improved upon? Nothing is perfect. Every game can be made better.

Apparently the PS3's library is better than 360's!

it will only get worse for 360 with Halo 3 already out. Oh wait, that affects me too, crap.

I've said over and over that the game has some depth so I'm not even gonna respond to that anymore.

As for Resident Evil 4, I'm judging the game based on the hardware it's on. You don't judge RE4 as if it's an Xbox 360 game, there was virtually nothing that could be improved in the Gamecube version aside from some minor details. Sure you can always add content but the gameplay itself was pretty much flawless. Same goes for the Wii version of the game.

Why make RE5? Because no matter how amazing a game is people wont play one game for the rest of their life. Mario 3 is better than Mario World but damn I still love both. Mario 3 is my favorite 2D platformer, which is pretty much perfect to me, doesn't mean I'll not play any 2D platformer I find inferrior. Resident Evil 5 is also on a much more powerful console which means new things can be implimented that weren't possible in RE4(so you don't dock points from the game for it). Also you base the game around the new things that can be added to give it a different feeling. That wont take away from the perfection of RE4, it will just add to RE5. 

Now you're right, no game is 100 percent perfect but some games come VERY close and those are the games I'd score highly. I just don't think Wii Sports really comes close and I can see the Wii doing much better

P.S. Resident Evil 5 wont be as good as 4

Why should a well made game receive a poor review score (a score that's supposed to be based on the quality of the game) just because some guy didn't like it? Personal opinion accounts for entirely too much in game reviews. This is fine to an extent, but it makes averaging review scores meaningless. That average score on gamerankings means nothing unless the reviews that form it are based off of universal standards. The problem is simple really; game reviews can never be taken seriously as long as they remain subjective.

or everybody get this
maybe its simply the wii doesn't have that many great games yet
just give it time and its average should break 70% and and top 10% of games break 85%

the idea of game rankings is to take a bunch of reviewers so they dont get biased opinion's. It has nothing to do with the controls(which critics usually like) or the fact its graphics aren't as good.

or everybody get this
maybe its simply the wii doesn't have that many great games yet

That's exactly what it is...

Actually it does happen to much, and not just with games but films too.  The simple fact is that a lot of people, some to be blunt whose only qualification is they play games or watch movies, are reviewing games and films and the quality of reviewing has suffered accordingly - although sometimes with amusing results.

Personally I wouldn't even bother reviewing something like Wii sports - to me it would be like trying to review playing ball in the park with your kids or playing a game in the garden.  But obviously as these titles are for sale and presumerably some Wii owners are going to seek review guidance some form of review is required.