I've read every other review of the game, and none of them make the obscure criticisms Jeff makes. Other reviews praise the game for the gameplay's innovation, and say that they much prefer it to old methods of control. Jeff says the motion sensing capabilities are like a glorified button - and he would've preferred the button. While all other sites praise the level of immersion the controller's speaker gives you, Jeff says it's "kinda lame". Every single review raved about the classic Zelda feel, but Jeff calls it: "Too nostalgic for it's own good."

Jeff's main criticisms, is that it dose n't make as much as a leap in gaming as OoT does...

No game does!

Of course, it's not going to reinvent the wheel - all console games are 3D now! How is it that he can bring down the score of a game because it's not as fresh as OoT was? If all reviewers thought like this, every game would have a much lower score.

It's almost as if Jeff wants people to hate his review! He says very little about the game, and most of what he says is negative. He neglects to compliment the game in so many respects, and creates ridiculous issues which no other site has mentioned.

It's unthinkable that he gave Wind Waker a higher score than TP. The ironic thing is, he complained about the story in TP, yet applauded the story of WW. If any other person on Gamespot reviewed TP, the rating would be where it should be.

Jeff clearly doesn't like the Zelda series - or the Wii, and I knew his review would be low.

Of all the reviews out of Twilight Princess - Jeff's is the outlier. When you have a group of numbers, and there is an outlier, the outlier is ignored, and the average is worked out without the outlier.