Gamespot 4.5 out of 10
Game Informer 5/10
IGN 6.3 out of 10
Gamesmaster 97%
Eurogamer 9/10

I honestly don't know what to think anymore.

Can anyone explain why this game has got so much mixed reviews overall? Could it be that some reviewers have been payed to give it high scores?

Different people have different opinions.

Still, there should always be some objectivity to reviews.
I can understand a 7 versus an 8 or even a 7 vs a 9.
But a 45% compared to 97%?
Not sure what to make of that.

I don't like most sports games but to be a reviewer, I should at least be able to recognise a good sports game even if I don't personally like it due to my individual tastes.

I can't makes heads or tails of that either. I mean that's a big difference. Too big for my liking.

Conspirasy. They are trying to make us confused.

..honestly don't know. Different people though the ideas was executed good or bad?

I'll take IGN & Game Spots reviews over the others.
So..uh....How about that Rabbids Land?lol

I'd go with Eurogamer and Gamesmaster's scores.

I'd say that some people are afraid of new concepts.

Exactly. I personally don't like fighting games (Street Fighter/MK/Tekken/etc.) but I played the new Mortal Kombat with some friends the other day and it is definitely a great game. I hate it and don't ever want to play it again, but I'd give it a 8.5 or 9 out of 10 easily.

ZombiU is just RedSteel with zombies, and RedSteel wasn't a bad game, but it wasn't good nether, and it also got mix reviews.
The Wii U doesn't have much excludes titles for its console, and having 3rd parties games like Assassin Creed, and Batman, which are already out on other consoles for a while now doesn't help the Wii U.
Having poor excludes games doesn't give people good reason to even get a Wii U if they can get better games on other consoles.

From IGN and gamespot's reviews, I get the feeling that the melee combat isn't very good and the reviewers refused to use any other weapons, or something. They complain a lot about the cricket bat.

Am I missing something, maybe?

No.

It's more that because the nature of the game requires you to use it a lot for saving ammo (since you don't want to use ammo often) it's not good to have shoddy melee combat. The reviewers just didn't seem to have fun with the title. I don't think they're inherently wrong about it. Neither are the people that adored it. This looks to be one of those love it/hate it games.

The blunt truth is that it appeals to a rather niche set of gamers, and not many have learned how to efficiently progress in the game, as its outcome depends pretty much solely on the skill and strategy of the player themself, not in-game. Zombi U is a very adventurous concept, as true survival horror has somewhat become an alienated genre in the industry; as a result, it doesn't necessarily bode well with everybody's palate. Destructoid's review did a good job of addressing this, despite giving it an 8/10.

Simply put, Zombi U is like marmite; you either love it or hate it. It's a game that's incredibly subject to a variety of subjective opinions, hence the very mixed reviews floating around. As a word of advice, judge for yourself whether or not you'll enjoy this game - reviews for Zombi U are all over the spectrum.

Reviews are only opinions there good to have, but they should not determine whether or not your going to buy something.

Yeah, it does sound a bit like Red Steel all over again. Maybe that's Ubisoft's plan, to release an exclusive "hardcore" launch title with a Nintendo console, that therefore gets far more hype and attention than it ever would have got normally, and then turns out to be a bit mediocre...

I have to agree with you on this. It is a niche, and it is a pretty ambitious launch game. However, you are not going to get a break from these websites for a Nintendo game, especially an exclusive. I heard an IGN guy on the preview talk about how all of the Zombi U problems had been fixed. I really don't even know why I bother to read their reviews.

This made my day.
Thank you.