nowadays im vary bad at recognising sarcasm.

Wait! If Official NINTENDO Magazine gave 87,can we expect 7x scores from other sites?

not a Zelda game, but a hack'n'slash game with Zelda characters!! so 8.7 is a great score

The Official Nintendo Magazine isn't owned by Nintendo.  It's owned by Future Publishing.  The same publication that owns the Official Playstation Magazine and the Official Xbox Magazine.  They have no affiliation with Nintendo whatsoever. 

The journalists that work for these magazines are biased regardless.  Most first party games get near perfect scores in all of them.

I've never been a fan of comments like this; moreso recently. Their scores are often close to the final Metacritic value. 

This time though, it'll probably go down a fair bit.

I know but this kind of "official" magazines usually are nicer with their review scores than other reviewers like Edge,gamespot,polygon,etc...

Of course it is.  It's based off a Nintendo franchise.

*edit*

You know my opinion.  Nintendo franchises are rated more highly for no other reason than them being Nintendo games. 

Poor tbone... :/

GamesTM, a British magazine that generally score lower than the Metacritic average, have given Hyrule Warriors 8/10.

I read my brother's copy of the magazine at my parents over the weekend, so can't post scans. Basically, from what I remember, they said:

1) There aren't as many modes/characters etc as Dynasty Warriors fans would expect, but what is there is polished to a higher degree than a Warriors title.
2) The game is 'as good as' Dynasty Warriors: Gundam 3
3) The elements lifted from Zelda, particularly Z-targeting and boss battles, add a lot to the experience.
4) They call it a surprisingly successful spin off.

8/10 from GamesTM is pretty good, as far as I'm concerned.

they also gave 75 for MK8. Curious right?