Why on earth would you need to put "For a Wii game" in a review? Do we need to put "For a HD console game" next to any comments on controls in those games?

People who are reading the review know its a Wii game so they are fully aware of its limitations, and all statements will already be understood in the context that it is a Wii game.

i never said i was surprised because thats your opinion. i said instead of proving your point you state how killzone 2 is grey and dull (which everyone who has the game will tell you its not since you go to different areas)

I have a grip its on my wiimote.

Well as i stated before its competing for MY time. So  I want someone to tell me everything there is to know about the game before i drop 50 bucks on it. millions of people see reviews and the person has to cater towards EVERYONE. this very well could be the best game on the wii but suck to everyone esle who has played killzone 2, halo 3, or COD4. So again its apples to apples.

i never said your opinion is wrong i said if you got a wow feeling LOOKING (i even put it in capps last time) at MP1 and not Killzone 2 your a fanboy. But then you made it clear you was talking about gameplay and hell my fav RPG of all time was xenogears and that game looks like crap now, so i did not say your opinion is wrong.

All i stated this whole thread was some people LIKE HD graphics. i never said you where wrong in anyway but you did say i was wrong when you said graphics mean nothing and thats mab a fact to you but its not to me.... so respect that

I believe that there are biased reviews but Halo isn't generic. I think that word gets tossed around these days a little too much. Halo is almost the first of it's kind. Don't forget that the first onee was in development in 1998!

The sheer ignorance from certain users in this thread (I will not name any names), on both sides I might add baffles me. One thing I want to make incredibly clear, since there seem to be lots of people who still haven't gotten it, the review written by Gamepro for The Conduit was purely unprofessional. Wii owners aren't even mad about the score, but the words. It was a terrible review that had no place in journalism of any kind. Trying to defend it is akin to trying to defend, say, a review of The Dark Knight where the reviewer immediately says that comic books are for kids and all suck, and then follows it up by saying that he's hated every actor in the movie for over 10 years.

It was not a good review. Stop going "oh lol yeah wii owners are mad cause their favored game isn't doing too well haha", no. It has nothing to do with that. A game for the Wii was unjustly judged and you'd all be saying the exact same words we are if the tables were turned. There is not a single doubt in my mind of that.

Its generic, stop lying to yourself. It stole gameplay mechanics from many games that came before it.

And I'm not talking about the first Halo, but the third one. I think the first Halo deserves some credit.

All consoles have biased reviews, it's not just the Wii and I don't believe the Wii gets it harder than any other console. Every console has it's set of disgruntled idiots just looking to cause a fuss (obviously they succeeded btw).

Firstly, I'm not trying to justify that bad Conduit review, I thought it was crap as well, I'm talking in general from this point onwards.

With the graphics in games, I would say the reason why Wii games get marked down in graphics isn't because they are unjustly compared with HD consoles. The reason is that, the difference between the average Wii game and the graphically best wii game of the day (SMG, MP3, even Zelda, take your pick) is alot bigger than the difference between the average HD game and the best looking HD game of the day on that system.

Sure Killzone 2 and Uncharted may look amazing, but I would not turn my nose down at Resistance (EDIT: Or even Army of Two, a game sitting at 79% on gamerankings), because I think it does an admirable job at looking like it's on the same playing field.
I could say the same thing about the 360 and it's games. I don't think I could say the same about the Wii for most of it's above average to great titles.

The better games on the Wii (NMH and De Blob as examples), do get marked in graphics, but that's because they (and seriously, NO ONE can dispute this) look piss poor graphically compared to the likes of Super Mario Galaxy and Prime 3. NMH's sandbox world is bascally barren. I don't mean to send NMH and De Blob into the firing line here, but you cannot honestly say they look comparable to the Wii's best (Even with colour, De Blob's buildings look bland and the same throughout most of the game, the only character the game has is the blobs themselves and the pesky police things).

So what I'm saying is, I believe that obviously developers tend to focus less on graphics on the Wii, which is fine for most Wii owners (I personally am not sure how I feel about it), but you have to understand that Reviewers have to review the whole game and one component (gameplay) can't make up for a lack of another (graphics).

There are plenty of HD games that get marked down low in the graphics section because they don't compare with the better HD games, it just so happens that it's usually the developers that are just trying to do cheap cash ins. On the other hand, you have the Wii, which has average graphics (for the Wii's capabilities) for both the shovelware and the good games. So obviously Wii's reviews compared to the HD consoles looks weak.

Again, I'm not justifying stupid conduit review guy, I'm just saying that there's a basis (I think) for why Wii games are marked down in graphics by reasonable reviewers and are driven into the ground repeatedly by the Bias ones. But I'd like to say it again, there's people out there that will nitpick games on every console, it's not skewed heavily against the Wii (imo).

This forum alone is enough to tell us that every console has it's detractors. Now if we could just get all of them to write reviews about opposing consoles, may OP wouldn't feel the same way.

Good post CAL4M1TY. That's all I have to say. Kudos.

I found MP2 to be the inferior of the 3 Primes (of course not including Hunters :P), but it was still a good game nonetheless. 

MP3 is actually tied for my favourite Metroid game (with MP1 and Super Metroid).  MP3 had the best gameplay of the 3 I find, and yes, I'll admit one playthrough on it isn't nearly as long as one playthrough as it's predecessors, but to me, that was one of the reaons it was more replayable which kind of was my next point:  There is (imo of course) more replay value in this than the other two.  Plus you could go back and complete your scans, which you couldn't do in the other 2 (although you might be able to in the Wiimakes). 

Not for me i LOVE Dynasty Warriors and buy everyone first day and they always get crapped on in the reviews..

Thing is theres not many games like DW.. but there are plenty FPS.. mab just mab this game sucked.... or was only ok. it currently has a 79 in the metric and all 5 of the reviews say it doesnt do anything that new. and a 80% is pretty freaking good now that i think about it so why are we complaining lol