I haven't played the game, but from what I have heard, players tend to get hit by items, and that it's especially annoying when you are near the finish line of the last lap. Basically, a whole bunch of reviewers (and players) who kept losing the first place considered it cheap, and thus deducted points from it.

The reason why there many are offended is because players who have mastered the game complained that those reviewers 'sucked', who took score away from it to vent their frustrations. They considered that such reviewers had no right to state MKWii as an 'easy game with cheap gameplay', arguing that if they were good enough, they could have gotten first place anyway even if being hit by item.

An outsider perspective anyway. I still have yet to get the game, and I probably won't until after I'm done with my AP exam one week away. I'm not especially good at gaming so hopefully I won't get frustrated by repeated failed attempts at trying to get first place, though.=p

 Yeah, anyone that has played Mario Kart since Snes days will tell you that you can lead the whole race no problem but then the last lap you get a turtle to the back and watch your freinds take the first second and 3rd place... Thats what the review is reffering to.

Oh, so, just the usual, then. Much ado about nothing ;) 

Basically the game is being punished for being too difficult. Like all Mario Kart games, if you get good enough, you can get such a big lead that the blue shell doesn't matter. That said, 150 cc is pretty tough, but the hardest difficulty should be. The reviewers couldn't master it in a few hours and said that it was unfair. Like any good racing game, it takes a lot of practice. I'm starting to think that people want a win button in games. That would be hardcore I suppose.

So how does everyone feel about them giving Boom Blox a 5/5?

Is X-Play still "phail"?

DMeisterJ said: So how does everyone feel about them giving Boom Blox a 5/5? Is X-Play still "phail"?

Isn't this part of the reason why people are criticizing them? 

I haven't tried Boom Blox so I can't say what I think of that review. I'm just sick of reviewers saying casual this and that about the Wii and then complaining when a game is too difficult and put it down to lazy AI. It isn't lazy AI . It's devious but in a good way. By the way, I use the Wii Wheel and don't think of myself as a casual tool bag. People don't want to try new control schemes because they are stuck in the Paleolithic Age. When you learn to use it, you'll find that it's extremely accurate. I didn't buy a Wii to use the "I'm not going to use motion controls" control method. All of this complaining about the Wii Remote reminds me of when people were complaining about analog sticks and went to there D-pad control schemes whenever available.

I'll forego a rant on the 'dumbing down' of games, but I think you've hit the nail on the head. Those of us brought up on games in the Atari age (us old timers) and the Nintendo 8-bit gen scoff when we hear that games like Ninja Gaiden (on Xbox) are difficult (this game, as much as any other, has an 'I win' button if you realize how to abuse a few moves), never mind something that's likely no more difficult than any other game in the series (Mario Kart et al).

This came to a head recently when a friend of mine (also from the Atari 2600 generation) was railing about the difficulty level of Megaman ZX Advent. I pointed out that it was really no more difficult than even a fairly sedate NES game (certainly nothing like some of the more irritating spots in the various Ninja Gaiden NES titles, and certainly nothing like, say, Silver Surfer or Street Fighter 2010) and, after thinking about it, he conceded the point that he was so used to just throwing himself at bosses 'til he won (such is he state of game 'design' these days), that the idea of memorizing and executing a predictable boss pattern was almost asking too much to ask.

Tis, truly, a sad state of affairs :( 

I watch X-play daily -- though I often fast forward through many of the segments that pertain to games for systems I don't own or at least don't care about (I will watch reviews for games I don't own but not Cheats or other features).

The first thing that people need to realize is that X-play has its own set of standards for its stars rating. It is more logarithmic. I cannot find what the stars mean easily -- but basically it is 5 is near-perfect, 4 is great but with a flaw, 3 is average (good for those who like that type of game), 2 is mediocre, 1 is poor.

So 4 stars is not too shabby. And I can say from having played it that what I get in boxes is better when I am at the back of the pack than in the front of the pack.

Mike from Morgantown

Why does there have to be a thread every time a Nintendo game gets below a 9/10?

This is ridiculous.