The fact that there isn't a clear winner in the console wars is what is causing the constant flamewars and debates. Well, the Wii is a winner but it is different than the other consoles, not to mention the PR piled on about being different than the competition. So there's two wars being fought: the overall console wars and the PS3 vs. 360 console war. Every score is a battle that needs to be fought. Every NPD posting is like overtaking a town in the countryside. Each news article is e-trench warfare; whoever can use the most news stories, which act as lobbing grenades into a muddy hole full of console warrior troops, is the winner...until the next thread.
The past generation was much different - the PS2 won with an iron fist so there were small skirmishes of Nintendo and Microsoft fans trying to take jabs but then we'd see the PS2 domination and that would shut them up. Any Xbox or GameCube exclusive was a hollow victory because it was either already on the PS2 (GTA collection, MGS2 Substance) or will be on the PS2 (Resident Evil 4, Tales of Symphonia). Nintendo fans were a lot more adamant but once the $99 price drop and Mario Kart failed to ignite the sales charts, along with word of a new handheld, Nintendo fans dropped the issue, preferring to speculate on the success of the DS or Revolution.
Anyway, I'm not entirely sure console warriors read the reviews other than the score. Some do so they can pick apart what they don't like and shriek of bias but most just look at the score and act accordingly. Most internet fanboys spent more time debating whether a reviewer was getting paid by Microsoft than reviewing...or playing the actual game.
