well i agree with that.
just forget about the "poor game" wording because that seems to be getting int the way of my point.
It could have had more. It didn't really justify the price. I can think of 5 things that could have been implemented for another 1k dollars of coding.
when you are a reviewer the worst part is when you know for a fact that something could have been simpler, implemented better. You know as I do that you have played games where an aspect was off.
You are just a gamer, but you feel you had a better idea than designers who earn a smackload to design games. That is when I think something should get a lower score. When a simple little thing was excluded.

And that is a totally cool way to think of it. It's about as valid a criteria as you can get for subtracting a score.

I just don't like scores, myself.

I agree that the review system is completely broken, mainly due to the internet and the fanboys who frequent it in my opinion.Reviewers are now afraid to give their honest opinions on games.Look at the stick reviewers have gotten in recent times due to giving games a "bad" score eg. MGS4-8 from edge and eurogamer,Wii music-5 from ign,Zelda TP-8.8 from gamespot.
The only way to solve this problem is to scap review scores all together as they have been shown in recent times to be completely irrelivent due to every hyped game getting 10's from everywhere.I'll leave it like this, when an 8 is considerd a bad score, you know that the review system is broken.

I really thrust in reviews, that's why i have only good games!

want to really lost faith in reviewers? just read the Golden Axe review in IGN. It's, litterally, writed by a lazy fanboy who doesn't even know how to play games. No, really, a reviewer that says that the worst thing of a game is that enemies often surround you, or shoot at you from diferents positios, or even from both sides, is just the lamest thing you can see on internet.

I don't care if someone writes a bad review of my beloved MGS4, but I just can't trust anymore a website thatb allowed that retard to write that "review?". Sure, the game is mediocre, but I just can't visit that site anymore. IGN died...

I only dislike the reviews that come from IGN and Gamespot... strangely speaking on this topic something caught my interest today about one of the said sites mentioned..

http://neocrisis.com/content/view/2903/1/

Link states that IGN has altered its review of fallout 3 for the PS3

Is this becoming a trend with game review sites? In the first IGN review, they say that the PS3 version of the game has some major issues. However in the edited version of the review, they completely remove any mention of the PS3.

Before"Fallout 3 is such an engaging and fantastic experience that it's easy to overlook its few minor flaws, but they do exist and should be mentioned. With any game of this size and scope, you can likely expect a few bugs to slip through the testing process and that is the case here. I had the game crash a couple times. I, and other editors at IGN, have also experienced an annoying number of bugs on the PS3 version that have prevented the game from progressing or have broken the world. In all of these cases, reloading the game has been enough to fix the errors and nothing was frustrating or detrimental enough to give me thought of not recommending the game. However, there is one major issue with the PS3 version that can't be fixed with a reset. Every time anybody on your friends list signs on or sends you a message (or any time you receive any network notification), the game freezes and the screen blurs for a few seconds. If you have a lot of friends signing on and off all day, this will completely ruin the game. The only way to circumvent this is to either play offline or turn off notifications entirely."

After: "Fallout 3 is such an engaging and fantastic experience that it's easy to overlook its few minor flaws, but they do exist and should be mentioned. With any game of this size and scope, you can likely expect a few bugs to slip through the testing process and that is the case here. I had the game crash a couple times, amongst other small bugs. In all of these cases, reloading the game has been enough to fix the errors and nothing was frustrating or detrimental enough to make me not recommend the game."

Objection my friend!!!

Games are not only graphics or complicated senarios....!Wii fit it's great game & sets the way of playing in another revolution way... 

13 years now for me gaming means enjoy!I enjoyed Wii Fit much more than GTA4.....

I think the verb ENJOY is the only creteria in games......

(I'm not a fanboy, this is just my opinion)

dedis , as i already explained in my post right after that,
my point was not that it was an unenjoyable game, but that it could have been a LOT more enjoyable if only a little more was given.
If I were to review something I would review how many people would enjoy the game and give it an "enjoy" vs "unenjoyable" rating I would rank it based off of how much potential it lived up to.

@ piggychan

That is ridiculous if true. That information would be extremely important to someone considering purchasing that game.

@ topic

I agree that the review system is broken. Scores have been inflated for absolutely no reason this generation. I think that GTA4's score are way too high, and Mario Galaxy's scores are a bit too high as well.

It seems to me that reviewers focus far too much on the technical aspects of games, and focus too little on the fun factor. That is why games in the Wii series get so many points deducted from them. The reviewers have forgotten that good writers are aware of their audience, and write to that audience.

I would rather see a letter grade system, although that could still be susceptible to some of the problems of the current system.

OK my friend nothing personal...