Total Biscuit does indeed try to be as objective as possible. The whole "objectivism is impossible, so I might as well just write anything I want" games journalism crowd is beyond the pale pretensious and asinine. It misses the entire point. The goal is never to write something "objective", for that, philosophically, is "impossible". What is possible is an objective method, a methodology of rigor, with a very simple but necessary template for what a games review should be. At the core of the analysis is the question, what the **** is X, what does it try to do, is that a good goal in itself and does it do a good job at the thing it set out to do. And then runs around all the technicalities - from graphics to gameplay to experience to etc. - that might help answer that question.
His format is clean and relatable. He asks the right questions and shows what matters in the games he reviews.
That's as objective as it can be, and it's as it should be.
Of course, he's no "brilliant" reviewer, and it's for the best he never tries to "sound" like one (just ask any Polygon pretensious twat for that kind of bull****), he just tries to be as professional as he can be.
For deeper analysis you might prefer someone like Campster (Errant Signal), although his analysis do trend towards the pretensiousness more than fairness or objectivity.