Kotaku has a new piece up on game reviews and why, in their opinion, they are broken. They raise several interesting and valid points about a problem that faces all gaming media, but I'd like to add another: it's damned near impossible for anyone other than the top tier outlets (who have the money) to get anyone to review a game unless they're already pre-disposed to like it.

Most reviews come from people who do it for free or next to nothing and thus, it makes sense that scores skew high. The difference between gaming and movies in this respect is that movies have established professional critics, whereas gaming is still making up its own rules.

The movie reviewers solved this problem a long time ago. That's why most adopted a simpler rating system in which a 4-star movie didn't imply "perfection" but supreme excellence. In most cases, games are penalized through being divided by a sum that they can never possibly reach. What does that make a 94 or a 9.5 then...is that our mortal interpretation of perfection? Is that the closest we can fly to the sun before our wings melt and we're doomed to playing Spongebob Squarepants XVI for eternity?

Read more on Kotaku.