I like it the way it is

This is also a big concern. Quarter to Three recent contributions include giving Forza Horizon 2 a 20% and Infamous SS 40%. Dismal sights like this can singel handedly ruin a metacritic score. 

Thanks.

It's interesting, and yep, the 'Design' is one of the most important factor, not always discussed and argued properly, I would say.

So, how would you find the final Score ? With the exact average of the mentioned subjects ?

I'm pretty agreeable on just about any review system with metacritic or suggestions for changes on it. I think the main problem is how they determine who's reviews they take or don't. That really needs to be changed in my opinion.

I would go like:

- cinematic experience (10% of final score)
- Troy Baker or Nolan North (5% of the final score)
- actual play time (15% of the final score)
- fun factor (50% of the final score)
- does my gf/wife nag about what i'm playing (20% of the final score)

Yep.  Meta should use some kind of filter, to retain impurities :D

By the way, as you said, something should be changed.   I would also go with enhancing what Meta are already doing : give much less influence in the overall average to these sites that have lost credibility with their 'reviews', and cut out from the group those who do not satisfy anymore a new hypothetical 'Metacritic quality control System'.

No. Rating some sort of entertainment is subjective - always. Trying to make such restrictions on the scores makes things only worse. You can review a game that is really not enjoyable, but the 'objective' criteria say it is good - good graphics, good music ... but somehow the parts don't fit.

no

I hate the rating of individual elements of a game. You either liked the game or you didn't and give it one score out of 10, in increments of 0.5. Talk about the individual elements you liked and disliked in your written review, because that's what the written part is for. But it's totally unnecessary, and immature as a rating system, to score each element. You don;t see movie reviews scoring movies for direction, acting, editing, cinematography, sound special effects etc etc. A game is not a sum of measurable parts. It is an experience you have and you judge the quality of that experience by how much you valued the time you spent with the game, and whether you think you would have had a better experience doing something else with that time.

Anyway, the OP's suggestion is not for metacritic, because metacritic is just an aggregation of the overall review scores from a collection of reviewers. So coming up with a scoring system for individual reviews does nothing to theoretically improve Metacritic.

Personally I prefer the Rottentomatoes approach to meta reviewing. The official score is a straight calculation (no weighted averaging needed) of % positive reviews vs % negative reviews. If 60% of reviews are positive then the movie is "fresh", if

This doesn't have anything to do with metacritic, they're not the ones making the reviews. This should be directed at all the sites metacritic uses, but it would be in vain, Because each site has their own "recognizable" review system, and wouldn't want to change that. Besides, the scores will be just as reliable as they are now.