Holy crap that's a lot of reading. I read portion of it and unfortunately I have to go to work so I will have to read the rest later.

I had no idea that the dislike for the Wii from game "journalist" was that prevalent. I've always enjoyed the Nintendo Wii and so I was blinded and didn't see this much dislike. Wow! That pretty much sums it up.

Mr Khan said: Once upon a time (on my birthday in 2008, actually. August 26th), Nintendo made a rather innocent comment about how core games take 2-3 years to develop. The right honorable Mr. James Ransom-Wiley of Joystiq, in his infinite wisdom, spun that into this:   Dear Core: Wait 2-3 years (Love, Nintendo) by James Ransom-Wiley { Aug 26th 2008 at 6:00PM } Nintendo has affixed a timeline to the vague, yet sincere promise that games based on the company's "core" franchises are in development. "We still have developers working on popular core gaming franchises but we need longer to complete these games, approximately two to three years," Nintendo stated in the October issue of Edge, as reported by Eurogamer. "These games are not ready to launch in early 2009 but are being worked on by all development teams." So sit back, twiddle some other thumbsticks, and let those other folk navigate the slopes for a while. Your turn's a comin'.   Which some commenters of course immediately corrected him on, and i continued to bring it up throughout the rest of that year on joystiq, reminding them that they should be ashamed to have associated with it, but of course nothing ever happened. He even got promoted.

This guy looks like a royal knob....

I would like to add my support to this thread.

Some of these journalists think they are funny, but truthfully they are only funny to braindead morons who can't think outside of the box.

I know this is going to be controversial, but I wonder if Dead Rising Chop Till You Drop would have gotten better reviews had Capcom courted the reviewers. I mean something along the lines of what was done with Halo 3 and Modern Warfare 2 (fly them out, pay for their hotels, let them play the game only in the facility in controlled conditions, although the latter wouldn't be to ensure the best online). Graphics and zombie count be damned, they would be treated like kings, and reward Capcom accordingly.

Actually, a lot of the Wii reviews seem to reduced because the reviewers weren't coddled and kissed up to. Take some of the contested reviews of The Conduit and MWR.

This line of thinking ties into the whole "nobody wants to put effort into Wii games, and that lack of effort means publishers won't put up for really promoting them" thing. Kissing up to the media is just another part of that advertising blitz that Wii titles don't get. Though Nintendo doesn't really do it as much themselves.

But that's not effort in the game. It's effort in getting reviews. It doesn't necessarily make the game better (see the non-reviewer backlash over GTA IV of why there is a difference).

Oh wow that moving the goal posts one is just pathetic haha. God I wish some people were better educated in the study of logic as they would easily be able to laugh off some nonsense like this as I am able to do. Good thread and keep it up.

I'd also like to see if you can find where they do it to other systems, namely handhelds, to see if this lack of professionalism stretches even further which I know it does.

This may be far fetched but I wonder if it's about advertising money... all that hate.. Nintendo doesn't need to advertise at "Game" sites/magazines.. their products can be advertised at a broader audience.. diffrent magazines and other sites.. maybe those journalist are hating on it cause their site/magazine ain't making money with it...

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned Craig Harris' awful New Super Mario Bros. Wii review: http://wii.ign.com/articles/104/1044744p2.html

Closing quote: "As a gamer I love New Super Mario Bros. Wii, but as a critic I just couldn't let the issues slide."

His issues? For one, he claims that it has "very little in the way of new innovation." Yeah, except for the 4-player local co-op which is THE ENTIRE POINT OF THE DAMN GAME and which has only been attempted like once before (in LittleBigPlanet). Nobody can say with a straight face that NSMB Wii is any less innovative than, say, Generic Brown Realistic Online Counter-Strike Clone #4897 (Modern Warfare 2 - 95% on IGN), yet NSMB Wii gets downgraded to an 89% based almost solely on this perceived lack of innovation.

Second, he cites a feature (recording your playthroughs to be played back later) that the game never claimed to have, and which the Wii probably couldn't even handle, as another negative. Yeah, it doesn't print money or cook you dinner either, Harris; why not cite that as a "flaw" too?

Finally, he cites the lack of online multiplayer which is apparently only a score-breaking issue in Wii games.

So, to summarize: Harris loves the game, but really wanted to deduct review-score points from it. For some reason. Gee, I wonder why...

It's cool to bash Wii.

Same concept applied to Smoking in early 90's urban American high school kids.