A reviewer's job is to give their opinion. If their opinion includes criticism of a satirical game's lack of self-awareness about perpetuating some of the things they are satirizing, then the reviewer is doing their job right. You don't have to be from a feminist group to be bothered by misogyny in a video game in 2013.
@TirOrah @bunchanumbers @wavelength121 @zyxahn I don't think that three reviewers are necessary. Two can be useful, though. I think that some of the best reviews being done anywhere are being done by Victor Lucas and Scott Jones on Reviews on the Run. Victor is almost always higher than Scott, but you get to know what each one likes and dislikes. That's the point of reviews. They aren't supposed to be objective. You are supposed to find reviewers that have similar tastes to yours. If you find that every time they give a game an 8, you love it, then, you should play that game. Some reviewers give a lot of tens, others don't. If you get to know their reviews, the actual number becomes next to meaningless.
We are obsessed with quantifying everything. I mean, if you love Wind Waker (as I do), then what do you care what someone scores it? Do you really require a reviewer's score to justify your taste? As TirOrah says, "ragers will still be ragers" no matter what.
@CaptainBerserk @Knalxz Unless you are running Linux, which significantly limits the number of games you can play, aren't you supporting Microsoft by using a PC?
Archimedes777's comments