I can't be the only one to have noticed this, but IGN is the only review site out there thus far that has given the Wii version of Bully: Scholarship Edition a significantly lower score than the X360 version. In both versions of the game, some new content and new multiplayer has been added. As for the difference between the two versions, the Wii version has been reworked with intuitive motion controls, while the 360 version is basically a straight port with some improved textures, but a host of graphical problems (slowdown, freezing, pop-in). You'd think that the Wii version would score higher, but here's the scores that IGN gave them:

Wii: 8.0.

360: 8.7.

Now, after seeing these, I wondered for a moment where the discrepancy came from. Since the Wii review praised the motion controls, and the 360 version didn't have them, wouldn't it stand to reason that the two versions deserved at least equal scores? Then I looked at the authors of the two articles. Yes, that's right: AuthorS. They got a different person to do each one. The Wii review was authored by someone named "Bozon," and the 360 review by Hillary Goldstein.

Today, 1UP posted their reviews of the same two versions of the game. In their case, both reviews are authored by David Ellis. And guess which version he rates higher? The Wii version got an A-, while the 360 version got a B-.

Now, I'm not alleging "anti-Wii bias" on the part of IGN or anything of the sort. What led to this problem isn't any sort of bias, but instead simply lazy editing. No reputable editor would let two different reviewers review two versions of the same game, since it's essential that the reader know which one is better. In this case, one simply had a different opinion of how the review score should be assigned than the other, rendering the reviews meaningless for someone trying to decide between the Wii and 360 versions of the game.

Ah, well. Just another reason for me to distrust IGN and like 1UP. :)

Maybe the Wii just has higher standards :)

^further proof that BOZON has a case of

Ugh.

You like 1up.

Go hang your head in shame.

It is sloppy editing. What can you do though. Judges have different standards.

After all the PS2 version got an 89.

How do you have a port of a game with stuff added that all works and it ends up with a lower score? 

 vv

 The way I see it, 1UP is like how Gamespot was before their advertising division started controlling review content. They're to-the-point and don't pull any punches, and that's what I want to read when deciding how to spend my hard-earned game money.

When it originally came out over a year ago?

 See I don't agree with that. After all many people still consider the Ocarina of Time the best game ever.

If a game really has such shallow apeal that it's rating would drop so low do to nothing but graphical enhancements then you've got to question the original review score in the first place. 

Standards change, the bar gets raised. Alot happens in a year.

Ocarina is far from a 10/10 by todays standards.

wasnt the 360 version full of bugs? i recall something there...