1up gave it a 9 and had an equally idiotic review (2 frickin hours of frustration to learn the controls?!!! Your job is to review Wii games, play your flippin Wii sometime or get someone else to do it).  For the record the 3 bad sites are Gamespot, Gamepro (which also has an idiotic review of MP3), and 1up.  The problem is not only are their reviews contradictory but many belie a total lack of knowledge about how the Wii works/controls which shows they almost never play it.  That's fine if you're some average gamer but not when your job is to review Wii games.

I really don't think they hate the Wii, I think they just review big games badly on occasion to increase site traffic. Two victims of that being Twilight Princess and Metroid Prime 3. Their review pretty much contradicts everything said in the reviews of 9s and above, so I don't really understand why it's worth talking about much. It's like counting in Play's 9.0 review of Lair. Their review is an anomaly in a set, as are their complaints.

It's as simple as analyzing the evidence.

We have them claiming that they reviewed it worse because not much changed, but in their review history they have reviewing all these games better, despite even less changing: Ratchet and Clank games don't seem to be affected by the fact that nothing changes between them. Nor does Halo 2, Call of Duty 2 and 3, Metal Gear Solid 3 and Subsistence, Madden 08, GTA3 and it's various nearly identical reproductions, Dead or Alive 4, Guitar Hero 2, Half-Life 2, Ninja Gaiden Sigma, oh and about 100 other games that are identical or nearly identical to their predecessors yet scored higher than them, and higher than Metroid Prime 3.

We have them complaining about it being too easy, however they make no mention of the hard mode unlocked after beating the game (which by all other accounts is incredibly challenging. IGN even claimed they haven't been able to beat it yet). This shows two things: Either they never even played through the whole game to see that the hard mode is available, or they simply chose to ignore it when writing their review in order to help justify their score. The reason they claim it's too easy is pretty bad as well: the controls are TOO good. That's ridiculous. Bad controls should never be a reason for the difficulty of the game.

As I said, their review is simply the anomaly in the set. There is one other similar review in Gamepro, which does explain itself better, but their complaints seem to be the things everyone else praises. So we have 2 reviews below 9 out of 8 reviews. I have no problems with the scores themselves. I simply feel that scores should always be explained very clearly, and they fail to do so. Therefor, I eliminate them from my consideration in the value of the game. If you are unable to justify your score, you should not be reviewing the game.

@ GranTurismo:

You have no idea which game is better. You have not played both. Metroid Prime 3 is, and always has been, the final chapter in an ADVENTURE GAME. It's not designed for multiplayer. If Gamespot does not take off a significant chunk of points from Halo 3 for it's unchanging formula, then that would be continuing the double standard that they just showed with Metroid Prime 3. It's ridiculous to say that multiplayer games should automatically be scored above single player games. Some people don't even like multiplayer, and the games should not be compared. The Single Player genre shouldn't suffer just because you think it's fun getting called gay by 12 year olds for hours a day on Halo.

1up Review (the best of)

"The funny thing is, playing Metroid Prime 3: Corruption almost six years later, it often does feel like the same game. Fortunately, that's a compliment: the franchise may have lost its spot on the bleeding-edge of modern gaming, but the changes Corruption makes to the series' rock-solid core still add up to something special."

Sprinkle in simple lock-and-key-style puzzles and epic boss battles and you've got Prime in a nutshell."

"But as with any first-party Wii game, Corruption shakes up (or waggles side-to-side) this tried-and-true formula a bit, mostly in terms of control ... Imagine your standard PC shooter mouse-and-keyboard setup, plus a view lock-on system (Z button), and crosshair that doesn't always stay in the middle of the screen."

"Confused? Don't worry, it probably won't click until you try it yourself, and even then, the first couple hours are disorienting. But given time (and a couple menu tweaks -- the "advanced" sensitivity option helps a lot), frustration melts into appreciation for what this new setup makes possible: kick-ass combat."

"And if it's all too much, you can always opt for the old, simpler setup (though maybe you should just stick to Wii Play...wuss.)"

"Other minor control issues sadly have no easy fix -- the Wii-mote's directional pad (down launches missiles) and minus button (used to switch visors -- more on those later) were not designed for use in the heat of fast action like Corruption's combat. Retro made a brave attempt to minimize the impact of the Wii's low button count by doing away with weapon swapping (missiles gain ice power, your beam adds new properties on top of old), and again, the scheme works better with practice, but you'll finish the game still wishing it had a couple more buttons to work with."

"Enough of the quibbles -- let's get into Corruption's major accomplishment: the graphics. Or should I say, the artwork."

 "Amazing as it is to say about a Wii game, Corruption contains some of the best visuals in gaming, period. It can't always mask the hardware's technical limitations (pixelation every time you're up close waiting for a door to open, for example), but in most cases the lighting, attention to detail, and wonderfully cohesive and imaginative art direction more than make up for the Wii's lack of raw horsepower."

"Speaking of seeing rooms multiple times, fans will be happy to hear that backtracking is generally improved, with a couple exceptions: a confusing system of identical-looking bridges on one planet, and a major fetch-quest errand tacked on near the end of the game (no one got the memo about Prime 2's infamously lame key-gathering?)".

"On the other hand, making scans more valuable encourages players to miss out on that art I was gushing about. If you're like me, you'll waste a good chunk of time wandering through Corruption with its breathtaking environments reduced to a gray-and-black mishmash, searching for big blue or red objects to scan. Walking into any new enemy or room your first thought is not to appreciate it, but, again, to scan everything. Also, being forced to analyze anything just to use it (like a door, so you can then open it), is just plain weak. Thankfully that's rare, as are my other complaints with ship-travel delays and the lag when jumping in morph ball mode."

 "On the whole, Corruption takes advantage of the Wii's biggest strength (with its unique controls), and minimizes its greatest weakness (through astounding art direction), while otherwise maintaining or improving upon the high standards and overall polish the series is known for. No predictions for six years down the road this time, just one for this fall: load a fresh pair of batteries into the controller, dust off the Wii, and surrender a week of your life to Corruption -- you won't be sorry"

Does that sound like a 9 review at all? 40% of the text is just complaints. The issue is not that every Wii game is badly reviewed by all sites, but some major games (especially on GS and 1up) get critics that does not make sense. Compare some other games scores at the same sites. A crosswords game for DS got a 8 at GS and Perfect Dark Zero got a 9. Is PDZ the same material as Bioshock or better than MP3? For fuck`s sake, no. IMO Wario for the Wii is the weakest in the serie (not a bad game), does it deserve a 9.1? Does Shenmue deserve a 6.8? Is Chrono Cross (the worst RPG ever made) one of the 4 perfect games like GS say?

Some scores does not match the text or just reflect the reviewer bias. You should never get a guy like Jeff (who thinks Tony Hawk 3 is worthy of a 10) to review a Zelda game. Come on, some of the guys at GS do not like Half Life (and even rate HALO 2 better).

I would never review a racing game because I could not tell a bad game from a good one. The same should apply for these guys at GS and 1up. IGN is less Wii biased because there is a Wii section on the site and they have less prejudices against motion controls. Even so, get those guys to review HALO 3 and they would say the game is boring, repetive and uninspiring. I hope you guys get my point. 

HOLD IT

As you can see this piece of evidence contradicts your post.

What? It does not? Sorry.

 I love your posts dude. I just finished playing PW3 for DS. Almost cried at the ending.

kber81 said: I hope some people can understand my disappointment as regards reviews of Heavenly Sword now. It's still very solid score - 8.5 and I can't say the same about IGN HS review...

As I have said, I have no problems with the score itself, I just don't feel like they justified it or gave any concrete reasoning for their decision.  I don't read reviews for the scores, I read them for the actual analysis.  An 8.5 is a fine score, but if your analysis and criticisms don't make sense, then what's the point of the review?

Yeah, it was an awesome game.

Bah, Gamespot will always disapprove of the Wii. 

It's not like their reviews actually mean anything anyways. I'll stick with IGN/GI.

Edit: wow, that 1up review is joke (even though they gave it a good score)

Do these gaming sites purposely hire editors/reviewers that don't like videogames?

It's just an arbitrary score a website assigns to a game.

It really doesn't matter.

Just more typical bashing of any source that rates Wii games lower than expected. Just like the bashing of any source that rates other games higher than expected.

Anyway, the game has no multiplayer and MP2 did. That's worth a deduction alone imo.