Reviewers should stop giving scores. That would prevent bullshit threads like this, score comparing, metacritic whoring, threads whenever a Nintendo game gets a score below 7/10; in fact I think it'll stop most of the shit I hate about gaming forums.

I have spoken; make it so.

A fairer indication would be to see what the review score average is of a game in question. If there are more than 50 reviews used in calculating the average review score you can roughly see how the game rates.

Your grand idea will indeed come to fruitition as key people capable of making this change will give a monumental announcement to become one of the most memorable in the history of games. Unfortunately for you, it will be aired during the 2010 Superbowl so only 3 people will ever actually hear of it.

I want to echo this about Gameinformer. It appears that its reviewers generally do not like the Wii.

Last year, more than half their staff did not list SMG in their top 10 games of the year.  As I have said previously in many other posts, I am not such a person who thinks that it must be Game of the Year. But since it was listed as such by roughly half the magazines -- for reviewers not to acknowledge it speaks to their bias.

(I will note though that two multiplatform games -- PES2008 and another title I cannot remember -- received higher scores for the Wii in separate mini-reviews apart from the main Xbox 360/PS3 review (about the size of the second opinion).

Mike from Morgantown 

Game Informer addressed this "issue". They said that many of their editors simply didn't get a chance to play the game before the ballots were due. Kinda cheesy but given the crazy release schedule of November 2007, it's perfectly understandable. We had Uncharted, Assassin's Creed, Mass Effect, Orange Box, and a few more games I'm surely forgetting release that month.