yeah but my point is, as someone who normallly doesn't let length bother them (just like my girlfriend zing!), I would know that that criticism doesn't bother me.  I still do this with scored reviews but without the number more people would have to find what actually appeals to them rather than just discounting it as a 6/10 game.

Yeah that's my overall problem with this article, it would really only be fair to compare the PS4 and PS3 in the same timeframe. Comparing the PS3's best to the relatively short time the PS4 has been out just seems misleading.

well, nintendo did release a lot of great games in the first 2 years this gen, and last gen, and in the gen before...

sony just has one studio that can make realy great games, and they couldnt bring out a game till now because they had one game realy late last gen and need time for a new one.

Asks what happened with Sony first party

-Lists tons of third party games to support his argument.

Anyway, it'll come eventually, were just at the start of a gen now and Sony hasn't released many 1st party games yet. There's also been a general trend this gen for reviews to become harsher and harsher. 85 is the new 90 sort of when it comes to metacritic.

Sony didn't abandon it's last console after only 5 years...

2013 was one of the best year for the PS3. They need time to transition.

The problem is that people have short memory.PS3 was even worse at the same timeframe with almost no games including some third party game not coming to it.Let sony's studios have their time as always.Eventually all this "no games" joke will end just like it ended with PS3.

Well, first of all, I think using Metacritic scores as objective criteria for quality is a mistake. They speak only to the general consensus among critics, not to any game's greatness.

Second of all, it's a little disingenuous to compare four years of PS3 output with fewer than two years of PS4 output.

That said, I do think Sony's first-party output this generation, on PS4 and Vita, has been generally underwhelming. But Sony's first-party effort last generation wasn't exactly stellar either. Killzone 2 was a giant leap backward from the premiere game. Uncharted started strongly with Drake's Fortune and Among Thieves, then sank into mediocrity with Drake's Deception. Heavy Rain, while ambitious and packed with interesting ideas, utimately deteriorated into a case of style over substance. Really, the best game on PS3 was a third-party exclusive: Demon's Souls. 

In general, I think that's always been the case with Playstation systems. It's third-party software -- often exclusive third-party software -- that defines each generation: games like Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, Grand Theft Auto, and Demon's Souls. The exception to the rule is Team Ico, the games of which are among the best of the sixth generation. Unfortunately, Team Ico hasn't produced a game in a decade.

I expect this third-party dominance to continue with Sony's latest home console. I'd wager games like Bloodborne, The Phantom Pain, and Street Fighter V will end up being the cream of the crop on PS4 when this generation comes to an end.

What I don't get is, if a picture is worth 1000 words...and we have YouTube...why are people still bothering with written reviews? A few minutes of gameplay (not cutscenes) with commentary is way more informative for this medium, I think.

The difference is that most of nintendos offerings are 'been there done that' stuff, whereas sony invest in a far greater number of new IP's and software technology.

Yes not all are super successful, but most are 'great' and many are GOTY quality.... and most importantly, theres a lot of unique content the 3rd party's rarely come up with.

Yeah, that's why most of the upcoming Sony games are sequels. Nintendo innovates with gameplay, you don't need new ips for that.