Rethinking Video Game Reviews

I have been watching several video game reviews for the PS3 system, and I have to admit I do not particularly like the criteria the people like GT, IGN, and gamespot use to assess whether or not a game is good.
Most of these criteria are purely subjective and in most cases will direct me towards a wrong conclusion or opinion on the game. I have come to realize that the basis of their review is in most cases on the reviewer’s values and technical aspects of the game.
Now that would be nice if I had the same values as those of the reviewers or if technical complexities or prowess affected overall value of the game. On technical stuff......well the most popular games in the world are the least technically superior e.g. monopoly and in video games tetris. So clearly that just does not count. On values well....most of the reviewers are young white males living in countries with abundance and wealth. I am a young African male living in a country with much less, so our value systems will differ if not clash. More on this later.
So I have created my own criteria which granted may have a hint of subjectivity but will provide a better assessment of whether or not a game is worth buying.
I call it the E_IV Interactive Entertainment Criterion. The pillars of this criterion include:
1. Entertainment
2. Engagement
3. Exploration
4. Education

1. Entertainment
Let’s face it, the main reason we buy games is for entertainment. A game must have a certain jazz factor for you to buy it. It must make one feel all nice inside while playing it. We do not need another serious thing to do over the weekend....life is full of too many serious things already.
2. Engagement
The game should trigger some sort of emotional reaction or attachment. I like games that make feel something when playing whether its a sense of calmness or excitement or fun or whatever. There must some sort of emotional investment in the game that will drive my need to want to keep playing the game.
3. Exploration
I like games that take to a place that I have never been. Whether the place is abstract or real or a bit of both it doesn’t matter. I immensely enjoy discovery, and the thrill of finding something or meeting someone new is something I always look forward to. There is nothing as boring and as unprogressive as constants. A lot of the new games coming out are coming out which are meant to be open ended and have received a lot of critical acclaim are the games that allow one to explore New York. Come on guys....how many games based on New York can we have? Where is the thrill in exploring the same city over and over again.
4. Education
I value learning. And there is much about the world that I am yet to learn. Games cost a lot, and a lot of time is spent playing them for those with that luxury. If I’ll spend money and time on something, that something should contribute to my development in one way or the other. Now games can educate in many ways and in many things; for instance one can learn more about certain events in history, and what it was like to live in those days, one can learn more about a certain topic e.g. nanotechnology in MGS series or at least trigger interest in that topic. One could also learn certain characteristics and skills while playing a game like the ability to delay gratification in pursuit of a goal, and problem solving skills and linear thinking or thinking in abstract.

With these fundamentals in place, I can say whether a game is good or not. And on top of these I can add other things like artistic expression and creativity. These are things that alot of the popular games seem to lack.