Many seem to be stuck with the misconception that people take a review of a game as the be all and end all, but this should not be the case. A review is simply someone's opinion, a good review should be as objective as possible but ultimately it all boils down to what one gamer thinks of a game. By this point many people would be furiously commenting that if this is the case there is no point in game reviews, why should one gamer's opinion on a game matter to me?
Many thought it was a masterpiece, I thought it was dull.
It is here that the real point of reviews is made most clear. If your average gamer reviews your average game and thinks that it is good then, nine times out of ten, that game will be good. If your average gamer reviews your average game and says it is bad, then it most likely is bad. They are simply recommending that you either buy or not buy a game, it is no different to when you recommend to a friend that they buy a certain game. Your recommendation does not mean that everyone on the face of the earth will think the game is good or bad, neither will the recommendation of a writer for Ign. It just means they would recommend you try it and that there is a good chance that you will like it.
Looking back at my example of Assassins' Creed: Revelations, many people gave it an 8/10 whereas I thought it was worthy of about a 5/10 at best, this doesn't mean that I am wrong or that they are right, it just means we have different points on the same game. So don't take reviews as fact,you might strongly disagree with what is being said about the game in the review so you should read the review, look at what else has been said about the game,maybe even try and play it at a friends house or via a demo, but if you buy it and you disagree with the review, don't get angry because all the review was was someone telling you that they liked it and that they thought you might.