Well, reviewers review things less on their actual feeling about it, and more on what the average joe (who reads their review) will think. (Think the Paper Mario:TYD Review from GameInformer).
I think a handful of the big outlets will knock points off for accessibility. They'll say, "well, it's not for everyone because you have to learn the controls," like it's Steel Battalion or some shit, "but for those die-hard few and fans, this a must own. 7/10"
Or there will be the small outlets that will say, "you know what, fuck you, you need to learn to play this game. The reward in properly learning the game goes beyond metadata like Pokemon stats, the intricacies of the game are crucial to your enjoyment. If you don't have fun with the gameplay, it's your fault for not putting in the time to learn it. again, fuck you. 10/10 Review written by David Jaffe Jr."
It could be like if reviewers weren't aware Fighting games have intricate systems, "The AI has these ridiculous moves they can do, like cancel their moves and do another one. Why can't I do that? Why make a game where I'm meant to lose? 6/10"
Mostly, I'm looking at GameInformer and IGN. IGN with their God Hand with a 3/10, GI with F-Zero GX getting an 8/10 for saying the challenges are unrewarding when completed, etc.
Basically, numerical reviews are horseshit, catering to your reader-base, trying to push sales, etc. need to be out of the system.
