So bascially stuck at 95 now. Unless you get 4 more all below 80 then 95 is the minimum meta at this point.

Not sure, but they are close, 2-3 100 perhaps.

I would agree, except the QuarterToThree guy's recent comments make me nervous. He seems like he's ready to swoop in with a 4 or 6 out of 10 score. 

He mentioned he wasn't even aware of its existence but now he sees that it has a pretty good meta. Just felt way too cryptic given the way he has trolled high meta Sony exclusives in the past. 

Wow, just wow. I ask again:  how the hell is this guy accepted on MC? He doesn’t realize that one of the biggest releases of the year was releasing? And for Horizon, he did his review nearly 3months after Horizon released. This guy isn’t a true gamer, let alone a true critic. 

Tem certeza cara? Sete notas dez! Acho que isso ja colocaria o jogo na casa do noventa e sete.

Nope. 

So basically you are saying that one guy reviewing his first game, or a publication that has a small gameing section like forbes run by one writer should have the same weight as gaming publications/sites that has done nothing but gaming for the last 10-20yrs?

Lets be honest here, who would you sooner listen to, random guy called bobsgaming that came out of nowhere and gave Zelda/Halo/Uncharted a 7/10 or IGN that gave it a 10/10 and even had a vidcast elaborating on their review of the game?

wait.... a game reviewer is not even aware of the existence of a game called GOW.......

and some wonder why these things are weighted by metacritic.

Why is he even allowed to review games?

I think there has to be some sort of standard or something met be outlets to make them even qualify to review games. Like a registery of sorts.

When he gives a 100 to a game like spintire (67 MC) but can give a 20 to Company of Heroes 2 (MC 80), FH 2 (86) and Halo 4 (87)... 40 to journey (92 MC)...

His scores are totally out of touch with reality.

Metacritic has some critereas to consider reviewers, but they aren't really that strict with some shenanigans.