Trying to find out what they could have done.

Original score (before last change): About 97.350. Total reviews: 32

New score: 97.613. Total reviews: 31

Now, if they change Cubed back to 9.9 from 9.0, you get 97.63125.

If you now subtract a 98 point score, you get 97.6193 (etc)

So if the original score was around 97.340 this could be what happened.

I have lost all faith in GameRankings' list.

to be honest i dont care, gamerankings fails anyway, no site like that can ever be 100% unbiased which is why i dont use them, also IMO neither GTA4 or OoT is the best game ever.

This whole debacle has made me lose all interest in all-time highest rated lists like the one on GameRankings. Comparing games a decade or more from each other, all while taking into account how revolutionary a game was for its time, is a completely and utterly futile task.

Comparing the games of a single console, or between consoles during a single generation has its share of problems as well, but works much, much better.

yeah, I have to admit, this is getting way too much attention...

no, wait... that's wrong.

this isn't getting NEARLY enough attention, but what we need to do is get Ninja breadman up to the very first slot so that people have no choice but to recognize that this is utterly absurd.

I don't care about deleting a review, there are a lot of good reasons why one would do that. What I don't understand, is why they take a review site that has a 9/10, and make that a 99%. GameRankings is not a site that ranks games. They are a site that collects rankings. If a site changes there score, GameRankings should reflect that.

^

I agree, I wasn't complaining, I was just stating what could have happened. I like trying to find out what happened with stuff, being able to use numbers and facts in a way.

 Sorry, I didn't mean to imply you were. I just quoted you because I think you figured it out :)

 I completely agree with you ssj12. While metacritic is alot worse at including no name/garbage websites, both are equally guilty of it and personally I believe they should have site users to vote on a top 20 reviews sites and only their reviews can effect the score. That'd fix the issue of current games with 50+ reviews competing with 10 year old games with ~30 reviews and the issue of nintendo games always having way more reviews than the other two platforms (which makes it all the more amazing that SMG is 4th, despite the massive 70 review count).

i hope they delete all non 100 score reviews