Games like Wii Sports, Mario Party 8, Big Brain Academy, Wario Ware, Rayman Raving Rabids, Mario and Sonic, and Carnival games review poorly because they are quite a bit different than what reviewers want or enjoy playing; they sell well because they are excellent social games. Wii Play and Link's crossbow training sell well because they are packed in with accessories. When you take these games out you get:

Rank    Title          Rating

3. SMG                    97

5. Zelda: TP             95

8. Paper Mario           85

10. Guitar Hero 3        86

11. Res. Evil 4            91

12. Mario Strikers       79

13. Wii Fit                 78

16. Metroid Prime 3     90

18. Red Steel             65

 Which means that the only unusual performance was Red Steel ...

Being that it was the best FPS on a system everyone was dying to try a FPS on it isn't a surprise that it sold well. 

I don't care about reviews as long as I like the game. Just bought Mario&Sonic DS for example, although I read some reviews giving it mediocre scores. I like it, it provides exactly what I expected.

And it's funny that someone rated WiiFit like a game. It would be better to rate this fun exercise application with highly recommended/recommended/not recommended. Game reviewers just shouldn't rate exercise applications like WiiFit, Brain Training or English Buddy. I've seen hundreds of mediocre ratings for exercise applications on the internet and in game magazines. Reviewers are gamers, in the back of their minds they will always unconsciously compare console applications to their preferred FPS/RPG/you name it.

Trying to prove that Wii games are bad? I see plenty of games above 80...and most of the games below 70...casual gamers don't care.

The popular system has good games for core gamers as well as poorly rated games with casual appeal, so the scores honestly won't make a difference.

I expect the Wii to have the most diversity in scores, and that's how it has to be...the PS2 had endless shovelware games as well...that's how the popular system works. Shovelware makers aren't going to make games for 360 and PS3 because they aren't considered the popular, casual systems.

That doesn't mean you can ignore the good games either, of which there are plenty.

Most of those games are 70+ How are they bad scores? :-s I don't understand what you're getting at.

Sorry but when you have the general gaming media using the word "casual" as an insult to a game its no surprise that the casual games are going to get lower scores. The reviews are absolutely valid in terms of people looking only for the traditional "hardcore" gaming experience and nothing else but when you move outside of that and you are just looking at entertainment value and fun regardless of the syle of the presentation these games do very well.

Which is precisely why the Wii does well. To a certain extent you can say that these games sell well because people dont know any better but when you have so many of them doing so well you have to start considering that maybe they really do enjoy them and maybe their really is a disconnect.

FYI, IGN has 30 Wii games at 8.0 or above and 39 PS3 games at 8.0 or above. So the tally is closer for some prominent reviewers than it is for others.

 So good sales justify poorly scored games?

 Then I guess this thread is meaningless. ;) 

I think this is the first time I've been hit by the multi-post monster. In my defense, I had to logout and log back in to get the post button to work at all. :P

Well if you want 70+ games then Wii has 49 and PS3 has 87. It doesn't help your case. These are Metacritic ratings I'm talking.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/wii/scores/

http://www.metacritic.com/games/ps3/scores/