I finally got to play the game and it is an amazing addition to the series. From what I've played so far the metacritic of 84 or 85 is well deserved. The coalition did amazing job capturing the gears essence and delivered a very high production value expected from Gears series. But, If you look at the final product there is short coming in both the campaign and Multiplayer. Everyone upset that this game did not get 90+ need reel in their expectations and should be very excited with what the Coalition does with the next installment. The 84 or 85 is setting the baseline of what can be expect from this new studios in the future.

Maybe share a word or two about those short comings?

I wasn't really expecting it to score 90+ but after playing it for hours and hours I do think it deserves that. I've also tried to write some reasons why I think so. It goes without saying I'm extremely excited with what the Coalition comes up next :) I would hope a campaign dlc too while they're at it.

I think folks are justified in their frustration. Take a look at another high-profile third-person shooter: Uncharted 4. That game sits 9 points higher than Gears 4, despite an inferior campaign, inferior multiplayer and co-op options, and much less replay value. Uncharted 4 was praised for "perfect adjustments to a functional gameplay formula" while Gears is subject to deductions for being "overly familiar" and for using "Epic's foundation."

I think one of the reasons I pay less and less attention to Metacritic these days is that my tastes as a critic are far out of sync with the tastes of critics from bigger outlets. Gears might not have the opulent visuals or artistry of Uncharted, but in terms of gameplay (what really matters) it's a superior product.

To be clear: I'm not trying to start a console war here. I'm just pointing out some inconsistencies with the video game review process using two of the marquee third-person shooters of 2016.

All your reasons above are completely subjective though. There are many who love the campaign of U4 and puts it past the others.

Yes, all of my reasons are subjective. All of your reasons are subjective. All of the reasons articulated by the folks at IGN and Gamespot are subjective.

This goes without saying. 

I agree that both are focused on different priorities, but I think it's perfectly fair to compare and contrast the two. Uncharted is more focused on scripted platforming and cinematic storytelling, and thus is more attractive to fans who value a more linear, movie-like experience. Gears is more focused on cover-based shooting and thus appeals more to the tactical shooting crowd. Naturally fans of different tastes will enjoy one above the other.

But I'm fearful of derailing the thread further, so I'll leave it at that.

To get back to the subject...based on your experiences with Gears 4, guys, what would you like to see in Gears 5?

I'd like to see much less exposition and world-building. I want the team to jump right into the action.

I'd also like to see The Coalition build on the horror aspect from Gears 4. This was the scariest Gears game since the original, so I think there's a good foundation there.

Metacritic is a flawed but valuable system. I think that the mentality of gamers that anything that receive a metacritic of less then 90+ is sign of a bad game is the bigger problem. Gears of war series doesn't cater to everyone and you will always get reviewers that have no love for the gears series and will be let down. 

I think mopst of us will agree that Gears 4 campaign < Uncharted 4 campaign and Gears 4 Multiplayer < COD or Battlefield 1. But, if you take the full package the Co-op aspect and Hordes 3.0. You got a killer app for Microsoft.  It's one of the few games that might make you concider buying a Xbox One. 

Oh, we agree on that. There are many problems on the reviewer side of things, but unreasonable expectations from fans is also a huge problem. I think fans need to find a few critics they trust and follow them, tuning out the white noise. 

As for Gears, I'm fine with folks who just don't like the formula. But I'm surprised that the series went from 94 -> 93 -> 91 -> 84. I get that score inflation was a serious problem last gen, but Gears consistently earned its high marks. I dunno, I can't help but think that if Gears 4 had some gorgeously-crafted, perfectly-scripted, emotionally-powerful story then critics would award it higher scores, gameplay notwithstanding. And I just can't get on board with that.