of course because others think they have NEXT GEN. Even tho there is nothing NEXT about it.

Back to top... About how "User scores means nothing", the point being made was that user scores can't be trusted because bias, fanboy wars, trolls & whatever reasons messing with the scores which is a very valid point, I think we can all agree on this. My issue is that only "User scores means nothing", while to be honest regular scores don't mean much either, gaming sites are also run by biased "journalists"/gamers & on top of that they get presents, money from devs & publishers, which excludes them by any ethical standart, from being considered a faithful, trustworthy & fair source of truth.

The point is neither is a good metric standart, so why single out only user scores, as if site scores were the real deal!

I personnaly don't give much value to Metacritic & most gaming sites scores... but my feeling is that many in here do, so why don't we try & get the facts straight at least, don't you think?

haha great Nintendo burn!!!

That solve the debate about remastered games. Thanks Nintendo for solving that one.

WAit they included ZElda Windwaker HD???? debate is on again.

They talked about sales then.

What are you on? They are honest reviewers in there............................. HONEST REVIEWERS................ :P

The 8.5 user score caveat. XD

Oh I'm sorry I forgot Microsoft also has a handheld. And the only reason Nintendo games have a high user rating is because they aren't part of the console wars, plain and simple. PS4 and XBO get troll reviews, Nintendo doesn't. 
 Also it's the PS4 and XBOs first year. I swear to god this shit is annoying, it's like people are absolutely forgetting that the Wii U has been out a year longer and that extra year makes a big difference. Why don't you compare the first year of Wii U to the PS4 and XBO, Nintendo won't be able to say shit. It's like comparing a console that has been out a whole year to a console that has been out 1 week, can you see how stupid that is.

the notion that we can take user review scores seriously as they do provide a quality insight on a game quality is laughable, when you yourself admit its full of trolls reviewing these games. behind these scores are dozens and dozens of trolls, the score that comes out is meaningless because of that reason. 

Of course the guy with the Zelda avatar is going to actually defend X and Y as seperate games, LOL. I swear to god buying the other version is like DLC, the only difference is a few pokemon and the color of the enemy shirts, wow amazing, totally different games /s.

Btw, there's some additional criteria at work. Vita alone has 9 games with 85 meta and 8.5+ user score (really should be 10 since Vita has a better version of Virtue's Last Reward + no game breaking bugs).

Which I'm now thinking was purposed excluded in the comparison.