Disagree, in the sense that it has a historical use and development.  It may have changed over time, and people may disagree about it, but I think we generally have a sense that AAA games bring clout to a system...they are considered good games AND they sell a lot. 

Now.  STARCRAFT MADE UP THE IDEA THAT AAA MEANS 90% ON METACRITIC.  HE DID IT BECAUSE AT THE TIME 360, WHICH LAUNCHED A YEAR BEFORE PS3, HAD A MUCH MORE LOPSIDED ADVANTAGE THAN IT DOES NOW IN 90% RATED GAMES.  It will matter little because PS3 will end up with more 90% rated games than 360, period.  Toss out the online games and recognize that 360 has a number of lucky barely-hanging-in-with-a-90-flat games right now, and its nearly even already, despite the fact that PS3 has had so much less time to put out 90% rated games.

Whilst I did not invent the AAA means > or = 90% on Metacritic concept, I appreciate the fact that you consider me so notorious.

I just dropped by to point out that 17 90%+ games to 7 90%+ games does not equal "nearly even."

I agree with the assertion that AAA is a buzzword. Fable 2 could, and might end up falling back to 89 percent. It'll still be the same game. It's just a talking point for the fanboy arena, nothing more. I'd never even heard the term 4 years ago. Never stopped me from knowing what the best games were.

You've also got to dispute the quality of the rating , is a game that got 90 based on 47 reviews the same quality of "AAA" as a game given "AAA" by 80+ reviewers ?, surely a game would need to be good to maintain a high average with more reviewers.

This whole idea of "AAA" certification is pretty weak and I admit i've fallen victim to the hype , like Zen said the game is the same regardless of rating. Many games that deserve universal acclaim don't whilst the games that don't receive it far too often.

The whole system is messed TBH.

I thought "AAA" was some kind of fanboy created BS based on how much quality a bunch of people deem something as having, don't tell me there is now a quantitative number that = "AAA"

@starcraft

If there werent like what 5-6 PS3 games at 88-89 it would be even.. one reviewer can kill everything.

One reviewer can give fable 2 a 75, and thats it.

In a perfect world every game would be great. Exceptional. I never wish a game to do bad, becuase in the end it only hurts me. The gamer that buys said game. Saying that, I probably won't buy Fable 2.

Fable 2 is getting very good reviews that fable 1 got. But I didn't enjoy the first game so much. Maybe it was overhyped and I expected too much, but for me it was OK. The whole every choice matters.... not really. Just adds points one way or the other, changes what you look like and how people react while you're around. idk. Wasn't my cup of tea. I guess.

I'm definitely the minority, but unless there's something else this game brings, that I don't know of, I won't buy it.

But great reviews so far. 90/100 average is fantastic.

Hopefully it sells well

So AAA is when a game is above average?

anyone notice starcraft changed his sig to metacritic and not gamerankings? Why? Because he would need to keep his favorite game out of the list? What a biased and stupid sig. Especially since he can change it to whatever suits his agenda the best.

Squilliam said: I think I lost all respect for Starcraft. It was when he didn't rush to update his signature with Fable 2. This respect can be restored by one edit of a signature.

 Ok good. When I first went through this thread I didn't see this post (no one quoted you and you got lost in the responses) I'm glad I'm not the only one to notice. I'm also glad that you favor the 360 so people can't try to discredit me by saying I favor the Ps3.