I totally agree.

Guys.
Since when is 7 a bad score?!

Yup. Because posting a number on their website is the extent of a reviews importance.

I know, right? Considering the system just launched, that is a very good score. I don't get why people have qualms with it. The reviewer seemed to really enjoy the device, for the most part.

Who cares what IGN thinks.

No, it is in fact possible to post facts like this without being an idiot.

a. You should base the impressions of a review mainly on its narrative, not on its official score. It's hard to discern exactly whether or not you'll enjoy something based on a number, as opposed to a few insightful paragraphs.

b. I fail to remember when 7.6 became a medicore score, especially for a console that has literally just launched. To me, it's still a score that justifies a purchase, but obviously you still need to acknowledge its flaws (GamePad battery life, updates, speed etc.).

How could an update be a flaw?
By their very nature, updates exist to remove flaws and improve system performance and add extra features. The speed of your internet isnt Nintendo's problem. Battery life is an issue yes, but since it can be recharged and we don't live in 1989 anymore, it's not a huge problem.

This is just another reason that numerical scores especially for consoles, need to go. Just give us the article and let us decide for ourselves based on the information. How do you even rate a console from 1-10 anyways? Graded scores are just a way to provide more drama and really aren't worth what people get out of them IMHO.

Yeah, like @CapnPancakez said.
Destructoid doesn't do scores for consoles and it allows for a much better score IMO.

Not to mention some reviews like the one for the 3DS aren't even relevant anymore (eShop was added, price was dropped, etc....)

A mandatory initial download of 1GB isn't a very inviting way of welcoming the player. Just saying.

Except they're NOT biased against Nintendo. Super Mario Galaxy 2 is one of the games that got a 10 there alongside OOT and almost SMG1, and they were pretty kind to Metroid: Other M and didn't completely bitch about Kid Icarus controls nor complain about games being formulaic (unlike one reviewer who considers MW3 more original then MK7)

While I agree the battery life is on the short side, I have noticed via YouTube videos that the game pad appears to have a removal back to replace the battery. In theory, couldn't a better battery easily be put inside it? If the complaints continue, I could definitely see Nintendo releasing an improved battery that lasts anywhere from 8 to 12 hours.

Depends on the battery itself. Surprisingly "better" batteries don't always have a better charge time

Honestly I don't see why the battery is such a huge issue. The gamepad is not a handheld you can carry around with you all the time. Chances are you'll be sitting next to an outlet anyway.

It could be considered a flaw when it could've already come installed with the console, as is the norm. But let's totally not argue.

honestly if u want readers to appreciate the narrative maybe not attaching a score would be a better move .. because with reviews the score is the final word ...
yes 7.6 is not bad but the writer's words were a lot more positive than the score so for me then there is a discrepency

Agree!!

That update is necessary to allow the Wii U to do the stuff it says it can do on the box. So yes, it could be viewed as a flaw, since a good portion of the memory in your system won't be usable.

I f*©ķγ love this console... It is da shiznit dudes... 1.7/10