Well, it won't matter. After this summer I'll be semi-permanently back in Louisiana, then I can rent all the low-rated games my heart desires.

Actually, I'm probably just going to buy Turok. I love that franchise, no matter how bad it gets.

I haven't read many reviews on VGC, so i can't really say what do i think about them overall. But, in general there are some things i like to point out about reviews.

VGC reviews have the strength, that people rate their own games that they paid for "you spent 60 on the game you have - how do you feel right now?".

Review today rarely seem to focus on what the game is, instead of what it isn't. What Deneidez posted was pretty fun, but too bad the attitude is seen in too many reviews.

You shouldn't try to be guessing what the target audience of the game is and what the target audience might think about the game.

Don't make the review for other people, make the review for yourself. Other people that think alike will agree you.

Don't make the review/score relative to other games, it's not going to go to eleven on a scale that maxes out at ten. The review is this game now, not that game five years back.

Don't make the review so, that people could bitch about it as little as possible, since people are going to bitch anyway and especially when you try to be "objective".

Good sides and bad sides don't need to be balanced.

Don't try to be jack of all trades, if you don't like the type of games, don't review it. But if you still do, focus on what do you like about the game, not what you dislike. There are people that like the game even if you don't and your job as a reviewer is to show people the reasons why they should buy the game, not telling them why they should keep away. After all, not to buy a game doesn't need an excuse, unlike buying a game does.

Focus on the fun and enjoyment of the game and review it accordingly.

I haven't read many of the reviews here, but I do understand a tendancy toward making reviews nice when you are trying to prove and improve your reviewing skills. Once reviewers become more accustomed to the process and have more confidence in their abilities, they tend to loosen up and start rating games from what they truly feel about the game and the comments end up being much more accurate, to the point, and many times harsh.

I think it is also because they are trying hard not to be bias when they start writing reviews and over time they know how to separate a bias from a game flaw.

Reviews, like movies and books critics, must take only as a reference. One of the big problems with the majority of "hardcore" gamers is that they take review like The Bible or worst. That's something no one should ever.

Read reviews to know what is about. Not because X famous reviewer said that X game sucks therefore it sucks. They are not perfect and must of times, videogame reviewers may be professional but they are not ethic like Matt casasamsiasgamiana wii music review or all that gave GTA4 perfect 10s.

Wow, there's so much foolishness in the TC's post, it almost makes my eyes bleed. Yes, they are opinions as are all other reviews. I've seen you saying "well in my world, blah blah blah," well I hate to be the one to tell you this but this isn't "your world."
I personally don't agree with all the review scores, but I mainly look at the review itself. And don't say "lots of people agree with me," more like the minority is loud ;) as is most of the time. And need I remind you, there isn't one sole person who reviews the games, it's a whole bunch of people, so when one review gets a higher score than another, it doesn't necessarily mean the site is saying "Game A is better than game B."

"DirtyP2002

I think the reviews are very Wii /Nintendo-friendly. Please don't ban me.

Halo3 getting 8.8 is just not what the game deserves. Check the stats bungie just published. 15 million User played it (!!!), 1 million user are playing it every day, still No. 15 on NPD, more than 75 weeks after the release.

On the other hand, we have got madworld getting a 8.7. I am not saying madworld is a bad game, but it is just not in the same league as Halo3 in any aspect.

This is no trolling, just my opinion."
Why have there been many PS3 that scored >90 and are some of the highest rated games on this site? Please don't post comments without thinking (or without blind fanboyism). Wow, Halo getting an 8.8, kind of reminds me of TP getting an 8.8, and people went crazy. Same thing happened on this site when Halo just got an 8.8.
Madworld has only been out a couple of weeks while Halo has been out over a year (I don't think Madworld will outsell it though, but I make a point). Also using the point # copies sold = quality game would then work for Wii Sports or Wii Play (which don't get me wrong, are decent games, but not exactly AAA titles). I probably would have given Halo 3 a 9 and Madworld an 8.5. I do think Madworld does compare to Halo (flame me :P).

This is not flaming, this is just my opinion of your opinion.