Imagine I'm not me, but rather someone else.

Let's say my name is Sara. I like Zelda, Mario, Animal Crossing, and pretty much anything with a blue Yoshi in it. I love playing Nintendo games and I have forever. I don't really like the new motion controls, but I need my blue Yoshi and Zelda so I get a Wii.

Do you really think Sara wouldn't be interested in reviews too?

My point is that there are other reasons to buy the Wii besides motion controls and only having reviewers with a preference for them seems like a bad idea just as much so as having reviewers that hate motion controls.

I'm not disagreeing with your point, in fact I agree with you. But, in this particular example, would review scores matter to Sara (seeing as how she dropped $250 for a wii already, and needs her Zelda/yoshi fill)?

Great OP.

I still have to disagree on many points though. First of all though I'd like to comment on your examples from this months GI. Are all those reviews from a single issue? If so, I think a bias does becomes obvious in the pattern of their reviews. The fact that they keep falling back on the argument that largely relies on them bashing the wiimote is quite unprofessional from as third party gaming magazine.

Yes they were all from the current issue of Game Informer. A few other Wii games were reviewed but with scores so low that it seemed pointless since apparently they liked nothing about them.

 Nonetheless, I don't think that only reviewers who prefer a particular control style should review specific games to their liking. We might as well then only allow racing fans to review MK, platforming fans to review SMG and stealth fans review MGS4...and the list goes on. Eventually we may as well only allow fans of certain series review those games, such as Mario fans reviewing the next Mario game. Instantly that system creates more bias then it posed to eliminate.

Agreed but I still think they should evaluate the games using the system's standard controller that comes with the machine not an extra cost option unless it comes with the game (like Guitar Hero or the MK Wheel). Not everybody has the extra money to buy an accesory just because a review said so. And they should at least be open to that controller, not starting with the assumption that it's inferior.

 Reviews are meant to be an objective look at the game. Obviously much of what constitutes the score will be based on subjective measurements such as we've seen in a German magazine deducting points from MGS4 claiming that the storyline is too complex. Many fans would add scores for that very same reason. Either way we are left with reviews that in the end are little more than the opinions of the reviewer. Right, I agree.

 If you enjoy motion controls then I don't see the reason why reviews pointing out "flaws" regarding the control scheme of certain games should bother you, after all you know you will enjoy them anyway, possibly even more so than if those controls were differently employed. If you are a fan of both the Wii and Xbox or PS3, then perhaps such reviews may be confusing for you when deciding which version to pick up.

For the most part they don't really give the motion controller much of a chance. It also apparently has not crossed their mind that not everyone's top priority is precise control. Some of us happily trade away precision for accesability and intuitive control because its MORE FUN. We're not all highly competitive. The cavalier way that the reviewer dismissed the "stupid wheel" really pissed me off.  The stupid wheel and the stupid zapper have brought those games to a whole new level of fun and not just for me so are we all STUPID?. In some cases they unknowingly make the game less playable apparently without knowing it. I'm sure sorry it took an experienced reviewer four tries to learn all the button combinations to get down the bunny slope in We Ski. I got down the bunny slope just fine the first time and never touched a frigging button. Does this man really understand this game?

 I saw a post here a few weeks ago or so suggesting that a way to make reviews more helpful and objective would be if reviewers tried focusing on different perspectives of the audience likely to play said game. YES YES YES and on the audience likely to be playing on this console!!!!! I think by giving a breakdown on who would enjoy and who wouldn't enjoy certain games would be more effective than simply laying out your opinions about it. The point of a review afterall is to inform the general public,AMEN!! and so to make reviews more useful the one giving the rating should consider every demographic of his audiance and comment on specific features different readers may like or dislike. 

 Kudos to the person that made the suggestion. It is in fact something I will incorporate into my own reviews in the future. Then I think I will start reading your reviews and not those of dyed in the wool hardcore gamers writing for people who mostly aren't.

What's neogaf and why should I care?