Maybe the fact that it is a remake? Most people who play ORAS had played the original and were willing to play the next iteration regardless of the amount of "water" in the game. Yes, water type is the most common pokemon type, and yes there is a lot of surfing, but the reviewer reviewed the game as a person who has not played the originals, or as someone who is planning to make their debut to pokemon in ORAS. If Gamefreak made changes to the actual Hoenn region, then people would complain that it is not a remake, but rather a sequel. The game was marketed as an updated Ruby/Sapphire, so IGN need to recognise that simply having "too much water" is not a solid enough reason to have a negative opinion on the game. What do you expect Team [b][i][u]AQUA[/b][/u][/i] to have other than Water Types? Pokemon Games are known to just be trainer after trainer, and having played every single Pokemon Game to date, I can definately say it is boring. However, the fact that IGN gave COD:AW a 9/10 for having LITERALLY the same game for like 10 years in a row, shows that IGN's reviews are biased. I dont mind the 7.8/10 for ORAS, but at least give us reasons that are valid? [spoiler]I read the whole review[/spoiler]