If this were the review system of a blog or fan site, you could dismiss it as extreme. Unfortunately, it's from a large magazine in Europe, and is an example of someone trying totally objective reviews - only to drop it like a hot potato once it became clear it didn't work. You said review scores are meaningless, and I agree. Where I disagree is the assertion that breaking it down into sections makes them mean anything. You can't quantify graphics or gameplay. How can you objectively quantify these things? What would earn a game an 80% instead of a 90%? Would a triple-A game with a multi-million dollar budget like Watch_Dogs deserve a higher graphical score than something with hand-drawn 2D animations like Metal Slug? And if it does or doesn't, how would you quantify those scores?