It has nothing to do with lacking knowledge. Hiku's breakdown also had nothing about what maps were shared, being on the other side of a battlefield doesn't make it an entirely new "stage" (you can easily find a chapter list on the FE wiki). I don't see it as any different as a reviewer would have to play both campaigns to have a true understanding of the game. To go back to your Fire Emblem 7 comparison, you can't really review the game based off of Lyn's campaign. It's expected to play both for having a valid criticism of the game. Incorporating choice into the game doesn't make the other route a brand new game. Nintendo used the opportunity of two games to cater to casual and hardcore fans with the difficulty differences.

From speaking to those who have actually played all campaigns, their experience was far more different than the rosy picture most are trying to paint. I was never trying to say they're virtually the same, but I don't think it's right to consider them completely separate products. A eShop prompt wouldn't appear to buy the other version if you made the "wrong" choice in Birthright/Conquest.

Well the fact that they have structural and narrative differences AND (and this is important) each can be bought full price as the "first version," separate reviews make sense.  One job if a critic is to inform consumers.  Since each can be bought first, independently, at full price, consumers should have solid, full reviews for each.

I think we should know that NOT EVERYONE will play both Birthright and Conquest. Because besides the special edition (which I believe isn't stocked in huge quantities) everyone would have to buy 1 of the versions first. That allows them to have the option of buying the second version or not at all.

Giving the consumers a differnt opinion/score for each one allows them to think which Version will they enjoy. Then they will obviously pick that one first. And maybe avoid from buying the other version.

As always, take all these reviews with a grain of salt. "They're an opinion" - yeah, Nintendo's opinion when they hold these reviewers at gunpoint with a sack of money.

Or maybe they couldn't fap to it because of the censorship? 

I guess they killed a lot of people when Mario Tennis got a 59 or Amiibo festival less than 50.

Seems like great metascores! I'll consider buying this if i enjoy Awakening

Don't be dense.

Before you get too bent out of shape about me picking on Nintendo, let me make it clear that all "triple A" companies do this with their flagship titles.  Of course they didn't manufacture reviews for those two games.  They were quick cash grabs to pad the system library/release schedule.  

Yeah, because Animal Crossing and Amiibo arent big for Nintendo? Animal Crossing being one of Nintendos best selling franchises. Not to mention Fire Emblem intill Awakening was very niche yet those games scored high reviews. 

But hey if you want to believe Nintendo paid the reviewers go ahead cuz last time i checked The fans all loved Awakening/Fates.... but i guess Nintendo paid us too am i right?

Awakening sold 2 million copies.  it is no longer niche.  It is a flagship IP now, one Nintendo will protect.

AC's popularity is the reason Amiibo festival exists.  Two bird with one stone, AC fans would buy the Amiibos, just to have them(like why everyone else buys amiibos).  Amiibo Festival is there to make the buyer think they're getting a value from their toys.  It's a Mario Party game with just enough AC paint to make it it's own thing.  AF ,Happy Home Designer and Mario Tennis were three games Nintedo could shoot out very quickly for very cheap.  

So yes, AC makes a lot of money but they didn't care about protecting it from reviews as they knew AF was rubbish.