This might not be true in all cases, I mean I think Grand Theft Auto deserves the high scores it's recieving, but do you think that some games get a high score simply because of brand name, and people are too afraid to give it a bad number?
I can't find the article, but I think an author on Gamespot gave Dragon Age 2 a 7.5/10 review and got in a lot of heat because Bioware was paying for most of the advertizements on the site back then and that was one of the lower scores the game got. It was boosted to 8/10, but had it been a smaller game which wasn't getting so much advertizing it would have probably stayed low.
So do you think some websites give average or good games excellent review scores because they fear backlash on forums, or from people spending on advertizing? Below are a few games which I think are only good, not phenominal, yet they recieved excellent metacritic scores.
97 - Super Mario Galaxy 1 & 2
95 - The Last of Us
94 - Metal Gear Solid 4
91 - Forza Motorsport 4
87 - Halo 4
If you think some games recieved over-inflated scores, please mention which games in specific.
P.S. Halo 4 didn't get a high score, but I felt the game was only average. It was a big drop in quality from Bungie Halo games, but it only saw a 4 point drop from Halo Reach. Forza 4 I think ruined the franchise because it forced us to tune every car before a race, and turned the sim into an arcade racer. The Last of Us is good, but IMO it's nowhere nearly as good as Uncharted, and other survival horror themed games like Fallout 3 and Resident Evil 4 are much much better IMO. Galaxy is also a good game, I'd even say a great game, but the best of the gen (after GTA IV)? As for MGS, it's great, but not award winning material IMO.