Beefjack: Is Metacritic really that bad?

[nitekrawler1285]

Alterego-X said:

nitekrawler1285 said:

Alterego-X said:
Even sales are a better indicator of quality than the opinion of a few dozen elitist, bribed, blackmailed, hyped niche gamers...

Unless you agree with them.  There are tons of games i've loved that don't set up the sales chart that are regarded highly by them.  Do I ignore their opinion because the games didn't sell well?  Why not everyone just look at the available info and decide for themselves.

I tend to hunt out game spots reviews because I tend to find their observations generally similar to my own.  Not saying everyone should but use what metric of quality works best for you as quality is also a relative term.

Quality is not a relative term.  

I also happen to like most games that reviewers like, but that's a matter of preference, not quality. 

When someone says "Blizzard makes low quality games", or "Dead Space is a high quality game", they make a universal statement, not just telling how much they enjoyed the game. 

And while I'm aware that sales are also flawed at indicating true popularity, I believe that no game that is enjoyed by many should be called "low quality" by others.

 

Quality is a relative term.  That universal statement is in comparison to their and others ideas of quality.  Doesn't make it absolute.

 

If it is absolute as you claim can you list the criteria for Quality games or does it tend o vary from person to person?