Is it me or is IGN's reviews getting a little erratic lately. Their latest review on the Wii U itself gave the Wii U a 7.6 and I'm assuming it was from one of their nintendo only staff writers....

His only two major complaints were horrible voice chat and the game pad requiring charging...?? I'm not an expert but I would at least rate the system a 8.5.

But 7.6????

Either way I could care less but just was curious about other people's take on this...

IGN's reviews have always been erratic. Some are written really well, some are written by bloodthirsty pigs bashing off of stupid reasons.

They're basing it on the system itself. So, you know, without taking the games into account.

Seems fair to me, to be honest. The system has flaws. A controller that is required for a lot of games that has a bad battery life is a pretty big flaw. Imagine going on a Zelda playing spree. The time you have to play is way longer than the pad can handle, so now you have to go near a power outlet. What if your power outlet is far away? Also, the voice chat is pretty bad. Not having it be compatible with the pro controller is ludicrous.

EDIT: Also, there were way more problems pointed out in the review. They're smaller than the others, but they're still there. The buttons audibly shaking is one. A lack of analog triggers is another, which means no sim racers will be fully playable unless a 3rd party solution comes along. There's also crazy long load times, which is odd considering it is running off of flash memory and should be able to load much faster than the competition. I suspect that'll be improved with an update. There's also the whole "Wii Mode" thing where the backwards compatability isn't really integrated into the Wii U, which is an annoying thing.

I'm pretty sure the OP just read the last few paragraphs rather than the whole review.

So basically people whose opinions you agree with and those you disagree with?

I dislike IGN because I seriously think they care too much about FPS games and Xbox 360 to actually make a good review of a good non-Mario or Nintendo game.I think the same with Gameinformer.

the battery life is a problem definitely I already had to plug in just to keep playing... and the voice can be an issue.. good point... Still would have given the system an 8/8.5.

I'm pretty sure a longer battery would have cost the system even more money to produce...if it's available

Most reviews came in at about 7, mostly because of the missing functionality and the long load times. The Verge and Engadget gave around 7 while CNet rated the system at 6, if I remember correctly. They mostly had valid criticisms but the six was ridiculously harsh and it seemed that the reviewer simply disliked Nintendo so I tend to disregard that particular one.

If the infrastructure for content downloads and the Nintendo network were more streamlined I think the reviewers would have had more positive feedback however my opinion is that they were overly harsh because they seemed to have the expectation that every single game for the system would "groundbreaking" or "revolutionary." None of them seemed ask whether the games were fun or not. Personally, I'd agree with you that they system should get an 8.5 as is and I'd give it a 9.5 once all the issues are addressed. I've played New Super Mario U, Tekken Tag 2, and Sonic All Stars Racing Transformed and every single one of them is a blast to play.

As I said, almost every review I've seen has been quite harsh but I understand why they assigned the scores that they did, given that the launch seems to have been premature as Nintendo was releasing primarily to be in time for black friday rather than waiting until the software end was mature. There's my two cents at any rate. Short version: "I love the Wii U but understand why MOST reviewers gave the scores they did.

And who is going to have a problem with being around an outlet? Chances are if you are in your living room you're going to be near an outlet. If not, you can get cheap extension cords at Walgreen's :3

@everyone thanks for the insight I believe the final product will be updated by summer time maybe....

I guess the overall score that would be given on the system would depend on your circumstances. IGN, and other review outlets, have to keep all of these circumstances in mind. Plus, a 7.6 is a good score. And many of the kinks at launch will probably be ironed out, so that score, so to speak, will improve over time.

lolno. These reviews are typically universally disagreed with, or just really poorly written (like SIGE's review, which is based completely off of price). Even users of IGN know what I'm talking about.

It's not nearly as bad as Destructoid but occasionally it's off with well-written ones largely in the mix.

They talk about games like I did when I was 14 and as for their videos ugh... half the time it looks like the remnants of a party where the last girl in the room claimed she was strictly into women, promptly walking away.

IGN isn't as good as they were back in the early 00's, but I still check them out every now and then.

IGN is a bad system reviewer in general. a 7.5 is way too low, IMO it should be 9.5

Waaaaaah IGN posted a score I don't like they suck.

The narrative was more positive than the final score.

If it's from IGN it must be true and worthy.

Where's Matt Cassamasina, Matt Bozon and Craig Harris when ya need them?
The golden years of IGN were the early 00's-2009

You people and your arbitrary numbers..

I hadn't played the Wii U yet, but if I get it, I know it it will be more than 7.6/10. Because the first three games I will be getting at launch are Nintendo Land, New Super Mario Bros. U, and Lego City: Undercover. These three blockbusters will show true potential in the Wii U and show that it is worth more than that low score. The review I am expecting to give it is a 9.0/10.