- Over at the New York Times, Seth Schiesel asks an interesting question about game criticism, given that a UBS survey reveals the relatively unsurprising fact that "top-rated games sell a lot more copies than bad ones."

What he asks, simply enough, is that "...if you look at film and popular music, for instance, there is almost no correlation between what critics say and what the public buy" - so therefore: "Are gamers actually more discerning than consumers of other media? Or is it just that game critics have more in common with game players than film and music reviewers do with the unwashed masses? And is this good or bad for the creative health of video games?"

This is a massively complex question, well-researched by the NYT writer, and I think the most interesting part of it is this comment from Schiesel: "It is worth pointing out that the only game among last year’s Top 10 sellers with a Metacritic score less than 80 was Brain Age, the mental-exercise software from Nintendo meant to appeal to users much older than the typical gamer."

So, does it look like the 'blind spot' for game reviewers (where the audience's enjoyment far outstrips critical reception) is casual games? I rather think so - especially given that a lot of major PC casual games don't even get reviewed by the majority of critics.