Let me disclose that I'm not an FPS fan, and I never cared for the Halo series.  So given the review scores of the most recent Halo release and the trend of the series, I do believe that Halo is about to run its course as a 1st party system seller exclusive.  But with that being said, I don't see why it's not a great game and will appeal to both FPS and specifically Halo fans alike.

Survival horror (Not counting the RE franchise) is one of my top three genres, and I'm not going to let "poor" reviews stop me from appreciating the games.  That doesn't mean that I will convince myself that a game is enjoyable when it's not.  But because of the genre, I'll give it a fair shake.  And I always find something that keeps me coming back to the genre whether I deem the game is good or bad.  So I try not to get discouraged by a numerical score.

Just recently, I received Corpse Party: Blood Party VITA in the mail.  It's at a 64 on Gamerankings.  I pre-ordered Deadly Premonition the Classified Edition, the PS3 Director's Cut is at 71.  Siren: Blood Curse at 77.  The Calling Wii at 51.  Kuon PS2 at 59.  And Cursed Mountain Wii at 69.  Yes, it's my time and money that I'm gambling with.  But I'd rather play the "mediocre" Silent Hill: Homecoming (at 71) over the AAA Halo 5 anyday.  (All score taken from GameRankings, and I own all titles mentioned with the exception of Halo 5.)

Yes, you have some PlayStation fans who will downplay the recent Halo 5 while the some Xbox fans will blindly defend it especially with the recent released review scores not keeping up with previous releases. But in the end, who cares?  The point I'm trying to make is that don't let the numerical score get you, don't fall into the hype, and just play what you like.  How simple is that?

I'd especially enjoy it if it was a 69.

I agree with you. MetaCritic/OpenCritic/GameRankings and the reviews that make up that big ol' number are just tools for us to help make more informed purchasing habits. Reviews inform us on potential trends, whether they be good or bad, that help us to understand what we're getting into when we play.

The average meta of my favourite games is probably 69 tbh

http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/remember-me

http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/beyond-two-souls

Siren Blood Curse and Deadly Premonition are both amazing games. Can't understand their metascore, really.

Homecoming is good, I don't know why it was so heavily bashed, outside the developers not having much clues about the Silent Hill lore itself outside the movie.

Dang, I came in expecting it to be a Captain Yuri thread, left disappointed. x )

Jokes aside, low scores like that doesn't mean they're bad games. Likely they're just alright and will get the job done of being enjoyable.

In the end, Metas are just an overall idea of the quality of the game, but scores are always just opinions.

Even if there is a popular opinion, everyone's opinion will be different.

I don't think people are blindly defending Halo 5... I think its just worth noting its still one of the best FPS games on the market and the reviews reflect that. If it didn't live up to the expectations of Sony fans, I don't think it matters.

Anyhow, I've been buying a lot of Xbox 360 games recently from the internet. Lots of ran shit, Splatterhouse, Beowulf, The Club, Nier, Tony Hawk:AW, etc. Basically anythig I find remotely interesting in spite of metascores. I'll just say this, most games that score poorly on metacritic are objectively bad. However, I find an occasional gem that didn't score well. For example, I REALLY liked Ninja Blade.

You know, I haven't seen many people at all say, "I'm not going to play this because it's an 85 on Metacritic."

Didn't know the critic metascore for Beyond Two Souls was that low actually liked it better then Heavy Rain.  The story was better.