On the other hand, trestres has yet to acknowledge that the other reviews in fact exist.  No-one is defending the OP, not even the thread creator.  

Update:  it seems the unofficial review average is no longer 100%, which ought to make him happy.  He can now acknowledge the reviews without danger of aneurysm.  

 We should see what Ign, Gamespot and Gametrailers gives it.

I'm surprised it's gotten any 10's seeing as how most reviewers seem to withhold those for no good reason. Not to mention it's being released in a year where we have already seen two or three 10 rated games. So i think it's doing pretty well for itself so far.

Just playing the beta, I don't think I'd give it a 10. 9, but not 10. The physics can be really annoying, especially for tight platforming. Having realistic physics just doesn't always work when you need pinpoint jumping precision and your character feels so heavy and solid. And the level editor while vast and malleable also takes alot of work to sometimes do simple things, and it's entirely possible to destroy your stage and have to go back and recreate it (I destroyed one level, because there was a part where a large section of the stage explodes, after testing it, and it finally worked right I went to work on the next section accidentally not rewinding to undo the explosion. By the time I noticed I had already saved and couldn't rewind to before the explosion thusly leaving a heap of rubble as the permanent set up...hours wasted.) It's a marvelous game, and I'm buying it day 1, and I'm having a ton of fun, but it's got it's flaws.

Does it really matter? I really don't understand why people are attempting to compare this game to other games on different systems and to different genres. Anyway, the following rant is not directed at you:

People really need to stop comparing review scores from one generation to the next. A review score really needs to be taken in context against the other games available in the genre on that system or at least that generation. Asking if LBP should have a higher review score than Super Mario or The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time is ridiculous. If either of the games from later generations were released on the previous systems then 100% would never be a high enough score. This is the same as Megaman 9, it was designed as a NES game, I really think reviewers should have also offered an NES review along side the standard 2008 era review. Many retro gamers like myself would appreciate and understand that.

Leaving aside the generational differences it is even more idiotic to compare totally different genres together to find out which is "the best evaaaa".

Having said all that, my favourite game ever is "Wonderboy III: The Dragon's Trap" on Sega master System, but to compare it to Gears of War 2? It makes no sense. I honestly do not see the relationship between two different genres in two different generations.