The district system and the active research system has me very excited for this game.

I'm not sure about the new aesthetic or stack-able units. Guess I'll have to give it a try before judging it.

I still wish the end-game actions of remaining civs would have large-scale impacts on the planet. For example, if nukes were used excessively, perhaps global fertility rates would drop (all tiles that reward food would provide one less food).

@Gelugon_baat: Journey didn't irk me; it was well worth a play/purchase. I still disagree with the perfect 10/10 score though.

My point, once again, is that reviewers have been showing persistent bias for indie games. Perhaps to promote indie games because they need the free marketing more than established studios. I believe such practices are wrong and mislead the consumer.

Do you not feel this is the case? Do you think reviewers judge both indie and non-indie games on the same set of scales?

@d-man: No need to project your narrow-minded perspective on me. I'm not angry, just disappointed that review outlets don't judge games on an even playing field. Also, I'd hate to review games for a living. That would take a lot of the fun out of playing VGs! LOL @ "entitled gamer attitude" comment for me thinking reviewers should actually review games based on equal criteria.

@Gelugon_baat: Most recently: This War of Mine. Decent game with an interesting premise. Aggregate review score on Metacritic was 83/100, IGN gave it an 8/10. Kept me occupied for four hours before I called it quits due to clunky combat mechanics and repetitive gameplay. I find it to be an example of a game doing something different (not necessarily good) and getting props for it.

Papers, Please is another (85 aggregate, 8/10 IGN). Again, not a bad game. But I believe the game got such high scores partially because of novelty and indie status.

I would not have bought either of these games.

Journey? Great game! But 10/10?

In contrast, I thought they gave Shovel Knight an appropriate score (7/10).

Obviously, these specific examples are my opinion. Everyone will be different. But that wasn't the point of what I was saying. If cases of high review scores for indie games weren't so prevalent, I wouldn't be posting. It's the awarding of extra points for novelty, indie status, or nostalgia that annoys me.

@Sound_Demon: Try reading my post again. I never said indie games can't be great, or borderline perfection. I said reviewers don't judge them equally with non-indie games, so it's difficult to tell if it's worth picking up or not. After all, the point of professional reviews are to inform the reader of that very thing.

@Gelugon_baat: Contrary to what you seem to think, I play a variety of games. But I've been burned on indie games that received stellar reviews, but turned out to be disappointing. That's why I'm here. Another 9/10 for an indie game. 9/10's, IMHO, are supposed to be reserved for incredible games bordering on that 10/10 perfection. This practice of being lenient on indie games should be called out.

Also, I don't exactly have an extensive posting history, so basing your opinion on that is useless. I just happen to be playing the ME trilogy at the moment and so am focused on that.

I've gotten in the habit of deducting 2 points from any score "professional" reviewers give to indie games, because I've found them to be far too flattering with such games.

@mkeezay22: That's an odd thing to say in a Gamespot comment's section. Basically, "I don't get the hype, so everyone who plays this game must be a loser." I don't play the game, but it seems to me you're as ignorant as this dumb-ass driver.

Anyway, I hope this guy was nailed for distracted driving.

@deviltaz35: And I thought I was pessimistic! Nah, I'm thinking 1st quarter of 2017 still. Which is good, because I still want to play through the original trilogy again, Rise of the Tomb Raider, MGS:V, Witcher 3, and I'd probably get wrapped up in Civ VI when it comes out in the Fall.

To this day, I truly believe the Wii U's biggest problem...was the Wii. The Wii was a phenomenon that captured casual gamers, but left hardcore gamers by the wayside. Casual gamers are, by definition, a fickle bunch. Which is why when the Wii U came out, those crowds were no where to be seen. Worse, many hardcore gamers had already moved on to either Xbox or Playstation.

If this article is in fact representative of the direction Nintendo is going, it seems they're trying to double down on their Wii success. If so, they may end up dooming themselves as far as hardware goes.