I had just finished reading the review for Muramasa on RPGFan and I'm seriously wondering if they let ANYONE review games nowadays.

RPGFan gave Muramasa a 69/100 but what really ticked me off was the reviews "conclusion."

It's fitting that Muramasa was released on the Nintendo Wii. It's a "style over substance" game that is not likely to hold your attention for more than a few days. In other words, it'll fit right in with the rest of the system's library. To be fair, it's a few notches above your typical Wii Lumberjack-style game. The action is fast and amusing, the artistic design is fantastic, and there are occasional difficulties that may even exhilarate (there are challenge battles scattered around the game world. Try them ten clicks below the recommended level and you're in for a treat). The game mechanics, however, have "casual" written all over them. Muramasa is ultimately the sort of fleetingly enjoyable title that entertains for a few hours every six months before going back on the shelf.

O hai, let's instult the Wii by calling it a casual system with no good games. :3

Review - http://www.rpgfan.com/reviews/Muramasa_The_Demon_Blade/index.html

Well that's how reviewers are these days.

Funny how he admids the game to be too hard for him on the "recommended setting".

Quite an accomplishment for such a casual game.

Metacritic should have a review of reviews like GameFAQs. I've found a lot of games get very different averages on that site. They wouldn't take wll over half the "official" reviews I've seen for Wii games.

For you an insult for others a fact....Don't let it bother you.

Eh

RPGFan's reviews are all fairly pooey, don't let it bother you.

Why did you say that? You just got yourself reported that was easily avoidable.

Just saying that their are two groups.    This kind of stuff is not new,  it should not bother people anymore it will not change.

You basically said that it was a casual system with no good games.

"good" is an opinion, so it cannot be fact.