Reviews scores are mostly worthless IMO. Metacritic is probably valuable because some people rely on it especially those who don't really know what they want. At the end of the day, one man's meat is another man's poison, one size doesn't fit all, etc. Real gamers who know what they want to play watch videos of the game and decide for themselves. I've gone back to games I ignored in the past thanks to the metacritic mentality only to be pleasantly surprised.
Now, some things reviewers cite for giving bad scores are pretty accurate. However, whether said "bad" game mechanic truly affects the enjoyment of the game is up to the individual player e..g most people lambasted FFXIII for being linear. I on the other hand wasn't bothered by that at all but would have preferred gambits to auto-battle etc. For another example, a game may be "bad" because of a terrible story but a gamer who doesn't care about story at all may called it a 10/10 game because his enjoyment isn't affected at all.
"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)
"WAR is a racket. It always has been.
It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler