That's a good start but when will he admit that our games are pretty good too. ;)

wow, lot of people posting !!

Just want to give a little more thing to discuss about the 10/10 :

"""
GamesRadar: First things first. This is the epic resolution to an epic saga and it comes on a Blu-ray disc. Just what sort of percentage of the playing time do the cut-scenes take up?

Paul Fitzpatrick (the guy that gave the 10/10 on OPM) : Hard to say. I didn't time the cut-scenes, but I completed MGS4 in just over 29 hours, and at a guess I'd say it was two thirds playing to one third watching. But that is a guess…

GR: How long did you spend finishing MGS4 for the review? What was your play schedule like and how how complete a look at the game do you feel you got? Anything you would have liked to take some extra time over?

PF: 29 hours and six minutes was my exact play-through time, and I saw everything I felt I needed to see to really get the measure of the game. I'd love to go back and play through with all the cool weapons and items unlocked of course. There are some beauties. Oh, and the play through didn't take in Metal Gear Online, which is being reviewed separately.

The whole interview (with potential spoilers (I didn't read it except what I posted above)) :

http://www.gamesradar.com/ps3/metal-gear-solid-4-guns-of-the-patriots/news/metal-gear-solid-4-the-first-review-is-out/a-20080512143146234035/g-20051216153655522074

I have no problem with people liking different things. I have a problem with people saying that SO many things are 10 out of 10 ( which would make them perfect). If everyone agrees that every good game that comes out is a 10 then developers start believing that crap and don't see any reason for improvement. At least thats how I feel about it.

Wow! Over 29 hours? They weren't kidding when they said MGS4 would be the longest of the series.

 Great score btw! I expected it anyways. Can't wait for June 12th.

Brecht disagrees. 

let's just hope it's sale performance reflects it quality , somehow it hasn't worked out like that this generation.

I think the disconnect comes from the fact that the professional reviewers do not believe that awarding a 10 means that the game is perfect.  According to his interview, the guy who reiewed MGS4 had some minor complaints and awknowledged that the game was not "perfect" but gave it a 10 anyway because the game simply blew him away.

I doubt there will ever be a game that is perfect in every way.  Therefore, if we make perfection the standard for awarding a ten, that just means we'll be awarding 9.5s, 9.6s etc . . .  and holding 10s in reserve never to be used.  Personally, I have no problem with someone awarding a 10 becuase the game blew him or her away.   

Frankly, that's not that different from other review formats.  Movies, books, restaurants, and records albums (even dancers on Dancing With The Stars) frequently recieve the highest ratings possible.  I doubt any are perfect.

Movie and book reviewers most certainly do NOT hand out the highest ratings possible frequently. Credible ones don't in any case (you can find some hack to shill for your product, of course). I'm not familiar enough with the other mediums to speculate on their situation.

Look, I have no interest in the Metal Gear Solid series. Never played any of the games before, don't plan to. I'm sure this game will be excellently made, with very high production values. But I'm at the same point as rocketpig: every single big-budget, high-profile game gets a 9 or a 10 nowadays. What's the point? The reviews are meaningless. This has nothing to do with one console or another; the last three Wii games I bought (Brawl, Mario Galaxy, and Metroid Prime) were all definitely over-scored as well.

Reviews are simply part of the hype machine for each new big release, little more or less. Don't you think that's a problem? Reviews are supposed to let you know if the game is good or bad, not make you feel better about yourself by validating your purchases. I'm just surprised so many people are vehemently denying that there's a clear problem with this system, even to the point that they've convinced themselves that today's games are SO much better in quality than ever before, EVERY high score is justified. Or by watering down standards so far, that any game that's fun and lacks glaring technical faults deserves a 9 or 10.

I find that depressing.

He was also a Marxist so it's pretty obvious he wasn't right about everything. 

I still think 100% or 10 out of ten should mean perfection. Sorry my opinion cannot be changed. A fantastic game that blows you away with minor problems should get a 9 or 9.5. 95% out of 100 is still an A right? Too many 10s are being given out. Sorry. That's how I feel. Hopefully MGS4 desrves a 10. That would be nice.