that's the whole point of my post. being a gamer does not mean you play ever game in every genre, which means a single reviewer shouldn't bear upon the responsibility and burden of trying to review a lot of games in a ton of genres. we are going off-topic, and i've already explained what the problems with single-reviewer reviews are, especially the problem of people taking the reviews as facts, affecting purchasing decisions, and even spreading misinformation and negativity based upon the said reviews.
it's okay to take those things as opinions, but most people don't. they see a score, that's it. they read the review, they take them as if they were absolute truths despite players saying otherwise. it's okay to read reviews and make up your own opinions of them, but they're being taken as the standard of the game's quality. a lot of reviews gloss over a lot of things simply because the reviewer isn't into the genre (again, in the case of gran turismo). some reviews go into more detail about the subsystems of a game's mechanics, simply because they enjoy the shooter genre.
it isn't about diversity of opinion, it's about opinions which vary greatly in detail, understanding, and information about certain games but their scores/opinions are treated as equally across all genres and all games. i'd take a gtplanet review of gran turismo more seriously than ign's, but people don't see it that way. they see ign doesn't like the game, therefore it's bad. it doesn't matter whether the reviewer is well-versed in the game or the genre, and that's why player impressions here on gaf are way better than taking a single reviewer out there. again, it's already off-topic the way it is, and i've gotten my point across so many times.
on-topic, although that's my reason why i wouldn't want sterling to review games, i highly doubt that's what ms pr actually likes to imply.