Fine. I'll accept it from you but let me tell you that my comment was a joke and I am not accountable for others that cannot see that when by its context it obviously was.

My comment on his comment was a joke too ;o.

I always call Gears for GeoW and GoW....(God of War) for GoW and come on that picture is just funny xD. ADMIT IT or I have to rip your head off too! x) <3

(Lets just get back to the topic now)

Reach back at 93 :)

and Halo:Reach remains 93 on meta

..Actually it JUST went down to 92 (lol)

Wut o_O i refreshed the page and it went back to 93. But I believe it had 48 reviews = 92, Now its 45 = 93. AM I GOING CRAZY!?

Im honestly really surprised that the fact Live is paid for hasnt come up in reviews considering how immensely good Halos MP is. I mean im not even argueing that its too expensive or anything because its really not in the grand scheme of things, but it seems that if so much emphasis is made on that aspect and its actually an added cost it would be either mentioned or brought up more.

Lets say the game is 10 missions but Bungie announces 10 extra missions to be released every month for 10 months for 3 bucks each prior to the launch, i think thatd be an important factor in reviews, yet considering how important Halo's online aspect is the cost of Live is never really discussed. I feel the cost of ODST brought those reviews down but Live is never mentioned.

Personally i dont feel it should be, but just something about "reviews" being broken. Theres definately a lot broken, the fact that one of the most fun games and likely the best selling HD console game of this Gen gets "only" a 93 surely isnt one of them though. 

Id argue games like GTA4 and others prove its broken, an amazing game like Reach geting mid to low 90's is where these types of games should be, imo.

92 now with 48 reviews, when I refresh it 93 with 45 reviews!

I HAVE PROOF THAT ITS 92! IM NOT CRAZY!

Illuminati is behind this shit!

(or the updating is simply taking time xDD)

Halo reach currently has:

14 out of 48 reviews that are 100
12 out of 48 reviews that are under 90

If you've been anticipating a game for a long time, love the screenshots and trailers, and it gets a 93 on Metacritic, you should definitely pick it up. It may well be that it deserves more, but opinion varies. Suffice to say that 93 is two points above Shadow of the Colossus.

And 92 is still higher then the best most awesome game this gen Demon's Souls!!

Did someone post a rant that Halo Reach got .1-..3 average too low on Metacritic?  This is less than 5% differential.  How is this busted, and why the rant?  And yes, maybe some people think it is an 80.  So what?  Isn't the point to find a critic or a few you trust and follow them to make right buying decisions, rather than treat all critics collectively as a measure of a game's worth, as part of some fanboy's war?

NVM