(this is a sales thread. read through)

Consider the metacritic (the basis of this analysis) scoring of movies: 60 and above are considered "generally favorable reviews" in green. Of the 10 highest rated movies that are playing in theaters right now, only 1 is above 79. The rest are in the 60-70 range, and these are all in green except for no. 10, which is at 59 (slightly yellow), meaning the critics generally liked them all.

Games, however, are rated differently. 75 and above are considered "generally favorable reviews" in green. Of the 10 highest rated recent releases, 9 are 90 and above, while no. 10 is at 89.

What does this mean? Simply, it means that game reviewers have been one of the following things:

1.) too cowardly  to express their real opinion.

2.) accepting bribes from publishers.

3.) using selective reasoning - they only see or hear what they want to see or hear.

4.) riding the wave of hype that accompanies big games.

5.) too loyal to their chosen franchises to care about bad things in game (fanboyism)

Obviously, the rating system for games is flawed. Too many high scores are given by default to huge franchises even though they don't deserve it. They don't seem to account for differences of opinion, which must always be present in most things.

Movies are rated pretty well considering that getting a 90+ rating is extremely hard and only reserved for truly great films. Games, however, see far too many "gift 9s". I wish that more reviewers would express their opinion on a bad game. If it sucks, it sucks! Give the damn thing a 2! If it's mediocre, give it a mediocre grade! Don't just consider "oh hey, it's Final Fantasy or it's Metal Gear... I gotta give it at least 7.... even if it sucks".

Because of this chorus of 8s, 9s, and 10s, I see that reviews are playing less and less of a role in sales. They need to mature quickly to gain relevance once again. They need to start giving 'real' scores instead of just the usual "score driven by hype". I respect reviewers who tell it like it is. If it sucks, it sucks.

 So I can expect mature reviews from Burgrichartz? can't wait!

of course! do you want to start giving reviews to bugrichartz?

Most game reviewers have played games for 20 years, at least. They've played all genres before, and liked most of them. However, sites will generally put a fan of platformers to review a platformer game, simply because he knows more about them. As thus, game reviewers will generally review games from genres they love. You can call it fanboyism, or you can say that they're being honest.

 I'd say one way of putting it is "Game reviewers identify themselves as people who love games. Movie reviewers identify themselves as people who know a lot about movies".

I agree; it's simply a case of the numbers being skewed too highly. A 7 score is considered average in gaming terms, though a 7/10 in any other regard is certainly well above average, into a 'good' category. So why then are game reviews so determined to give so many reviews around the 8-9.5 mark? I think its a lost sense of comparison; with an influx of increased hype around games due to the explosion of forums, discussions, easily accessible trailers and pictures and whatever in the past decade, reviewers just get caught up in all of it.

The gaming industry is fucked up in general. I mean, without Vgchartz, there would be pretty much no sales data for videogames that's available to the public. It's pathetic. As for reviewers, they're just giving the gamers what they want. "Gamers" are really just big babies. No one really wants integrity from reviewers. They just want to see their favorite games get high scores. Just look at how much hate Gerstmann got for giving Twilight Princess an 8.8. Yes, an 8.8. A perfectly good score.

When gamers stop sucking, I'm sure the reviewers will follow suit. We also need to stop thinking of game reviews as being a percentage of 100, and rather as "positive" or "negative" (similar to what Rotten Tomatoes does). 

I just hate reviewers that give a bad score saying its because "its just the same old formula", and then they later give a good review for a different gaming saying its because "its the same great formula".

You've picked up on my main problem with the review system here. I wish we had a review scale similar to that used for movies. Sure, games would score lower than they do now, but it would be a universal thing, and it would help identify the true cream of the crop even more, and it would stop a few average games from getting undeserved high praise.

I think reviewers are actually starting to be a bit more aggressive. Just look at fable 3 and GT5. Some people might have thought Fable 3's score is too low and and GT5's score is too low. But maybe they actually deserved those scores????

I don' t see what the big deal is. It's not worse than any other entertainment medium. People have different preferences, motivations, biases, etc.

I have seen plenty of movies that got great reviews that I really hated. And there have been plenty of movies that critics panned that I love. But I don't bitch about it even though it happens a lot. Actually, I probably have complained about it, but I no longer care anymore, I've moved on.