Worst review ever and couldnt have been more wrong. Proof can be seen at Metacritic.com. Wii version is rated a 57 while the completelt garbage 360 version is 39. It’s easy to see this is a hate reveiw and not a real review with any kind of cred.  Controls are completely wrecked? Never saw that in any other review from real journalists. Co-op is hard to cope with because of 480p? Really this must be your first gen of gaming then because until this gen we werent even gaming at 480p, but now we are supose to think it hurts? Pathetic.

Anyway dont listen to this guy and hey dont take my word for it. Go get some real reveiws from real gaming sites with real educated journalists that get paid to review games based on the console they are and not based off of their personal bias.

Thanks to this review I am buying the game on Wii. Just to know for sure that this review is a complete joke.

Can you elaborate on the ’hate review’ part? Do you think this is a Wii-bashing review? That seems to be the obvious conclusion, and it would be untrue. Check my article history, you’ll see I’ve reviewed Sam & Max: Season One for the Wii and thought it was great, giving it an 8.0. I also run quite a bit of homebrew on my Wii (and have been asked to consider some articles looking at this), plus have a decent library including games like Guilty Gear XX Accent Core, Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn, Resident Evil 4, Super Mario Galaxy, and so on. Nor is this my first gaming generation; I actually got my start in MS-DOS, the Atari 2600, and the NES. I remember editing autoexec.bat and config.sys files to get enough conventional memory freed up for Wing Commander 2 on DOS, discovering that the first boss in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (NES) could be beaten by Donatello’s crouch attack at no risk to yourself, and even played Warlords on an Atari 2600 paddle.

But I find it silly you say Metacritic is the reason I’m wrong. If all gaming reviewers are supposed to be in agreement, then you may as well see if we can get the Borg hivemind to do reviews and trim a lot of middlemen out of the industry. It’s worth pointing out that not all sites use the 0-10 scale the same way. I saw a Gamespot review for some Tiger Woods game a while back, complaining of reproducible showstopping bugs. It got a 6.5 accompanied by negative review text. That would have been more like a 4.0 or below (probably lower) in my book. So Metacritic’s averages mean very little to me.

I do play the games I review, and I play them thoroughly. I don’t have a hate-on for the Wii as a piece of technology, I just felt the Wii’s technologies weren’t suited to this game and I really did like the 360 version more. If that’s an inversion of popular opinion, so be it. I offer a different opinion, not an insincere one.

That said, I’m pleased my article influenced your purchasing decision. Sure, you’re acting contrary to my advice, but I still had some significant effect on you. I’m pretty sure that means I’m doing that part of the job right; I am engaging the reader and making them think and react. That’s good.

At Metacritic, that 57 is partly because:

Gamespot 30 - Onechanbara makes zombie-slaying women boring.

Games Radar 30 - the motion controls utterly wreck what should just be mindless zombie-goring fun. (look they say the controls are bad!)

Gametrailers 46 - and gameplay that will literally leave you sore (also about the controls)

I think that I have sufficiently proven that you did not bother to read and are simply a rabid fan or perhaps a developer...whoever you are, you most certainly are not the voice of reason.