"How about don't needlessly over-react because Summa left out a detail in a hands on that wasn't a full review months before the game comes out?"

I'm not overreacting because Summa left out a detail. I'm calling Summs out for a completely phoned-in hands-on that I could have written FOR him without having played the game at all. Here, let me show you paragraph by paragraph what his comments boil down to, and then tell me you couldn't have written this for him as well.

Paragraph 1: Mention that HoTD was good. Use that as a sarcastic comparison to demonstrate that RE:UC sucks.

Paragraph 2: First, tell us that the fact this game sucks is not completely the Wii's fault and that this actually surprises him. This implies that the fact most other Wii games suck is strictly because the Wii sucks. Oh, and somehow saying this isn't the Wii's fault is supposed to demonstrate non-bias. Also, he informs that a standard FPS couldn't work on the system.

Paragraph 3: The graphics and Sounds suck. Also mention this is to be "expected". Somehow this guy is unbiased?

Paragraph 4: More sarcasm about how some games are good and this game is not like those games.

Paragraph 5: Ok, apparently, he didn't go into enough detail about how the graphics sucked, so lets explain how bad they were. Oh, also, did he happen to mention PS2 games rule? Yeah, they do. Lets keep moving.

Paragrah 6: Gameplay totally sucked. It was slow AND sluggish. Not JUST slow, but also.......sluggish. Oh, and in case you missed it? This was all to be expected because of the Wii's limitations.

Paragraph 7: Oh you wanna know what REALLY sucked? Yeah, the controls. They sucked too.

Paragraph 8: More exposition on how the controls sucks. Oh, and did I mention Halo is awesome and this game sucks? Well both are true.

Paragraph 9: The first nod to the fact that this game is nowhere near complete. "Hopefully developers will fix this major flaw".

Paragraph 10: As for story, he's not sure if there was one, he was too busy hating the game to notice. He doesn't mention which characters from previous RE's were playable or what that might imply for the story, nor does he mention where the gameplay takes place which might also give us insight into the story. Clearly he's not an RE expert. Fine. He says Capcom claims there will be a deep story, but for some reason he seems incredulous. Why? We don't know. Either he doesn't like Capcom or he doesn't like the Wii. I don't have to tell you what my guess is.

Paragraph 11: In case you missed it, this games sucks hard.
It could work, if it were totally different and didn't suck so bad. The Wii only has party games which sucks and thats why this game is important because it's the only non party-game on the system. He wishes this game didn't suck, but.....it does.

Paragraph 12: All the developers have to do to make this game good? Make it so it doesn't suck.

So yeah, phoned in. While not every preview was completely positive, at least from other reviewers you get an actual idea of the game, ya know, how it fits into the RE universe, who may or may not be playable, an actual idea of what the conrol and gameplay was like, which weapons were available, were assets used from other games?, comments about desctructive environments, rather than a bitchfest about reload not working right and the graphics sucking.
All the stuff that you'd WANT to get in a preview, at least what I would want to get in a preview. To me, it's not just about whether a game is good or bad, but more about what is happening. So much of "good vs. bad" is in the eye of the beholder that it shouldn't be the complete focus of a preview IMO. So, no I'm not over-reacting to a missing detail. I'm commenting on a very weak preview that was totally spit out at us by someone who's opinion of the system clearly colors their experience with the games. From this preview, I have no idea if I would have liked the game personally because I only got his personal reactions to things, no actual information that I could judge myself. A good preview should give you an idea if YOU would be interested in the game, not just tell us that the reviewer is not. I have no problem with Summa having an opinion, he should, I'm glad he does. It just bothers me that he CONSTANTLY lets his opinion keep him from giving us objective information.