This thread is funny.

LBP: GOTY

lol...
Good try.

Two goty editions, a ps2 game and a dlc with only 10 reviews. I think its pretty fair to say that your list is extremely biased.

While metacritic has its faults all games go through the same metric and it is the far more reputable site as it is actually used by both publishers an developers.

How have I disproven my point at all? I've completely proven it if anything. I'm saying that Mass Effect is a true AAA game. It managed to get a 96 after 95 reviews. It may have been at that score since the very beginning...but this is Mass Effect 2 we're talking about here...games like this and Uncharted only happen two or three times a year and that's if we're lucky. The other two games I mentioned, however, only got 90's...with wayyyy less reviews then Mass Effect. What I'm saying is that IF those games had as many reviews as Mass Effect, their ratings would undoubtably drop. You can deny this fact...but it happens with 80% of games (probably even more).

And yes, I obviousley realize that many smaller websites don't review games like Gemetry Wars. But this only goes to prove my point. Even if this is the case, it is clearly creating an enviornment where 1 game gets a 90 because it is judged based on 52 reviews (Geometry Wars) while another game gets 89 because it is judged based on 95 reviews (Fable II). So we are supposed to accept that Geometry Wars is "AAA" while Fable II is "AA"? Give me a fucking break... If Geometry Wars was reviewed as many times as Fable, it would have (rightfully) been lower on metacritic. See it even applies to games on the same platform, no need to keep the debate about the consoles. And my problem with it isn't even when we get games like Geometry Wars ranking so high...it's when ppl start calling games like Fable and Left 4 Dead "AA".

Another extremely obvious case of this would be the second comparison I made. Portal: Still Alive on Xbox 360 currently sits at a metascore of 90 with only 21 reviews. Then we have a game like Demons Souls on PS3 which has been reviewed more than twice as many times as Portal. It currently sits at an 89. If we added another 23 reviews to Portal, there is no friggin way it would still hold at 90...That ONLY happens with games like Mass Effect...games that are clearly AAA and revolutionize their genre.

As a compelte sidenote, how could you possibly claim that Forza 2 is not a high profile game and use that as the excuse for the number of reviews it has on Meta? The first Forza has more than 70 reviews on Metacritic. Forza 3 has 89 reviews. Then out of nowhere, Forza 2, only has 66 reviews. There NEEDS to be a way of treating all games equally...untill the day Gamerankings and Metacritic can do that, their scores for games mean ABSOLUTLEY NOTHING when it comes time to argue. The only thing they are good for is to give you a general idea...not to have stupid debates about which console has more "AAA" games.

WOW after this thread I went on Metacritic and looked at the Wii section and all I can say is I hate that site even more than before now.

ROFL @ the last 2 comments form 360 fanboys!!

Bu bu but green burg said we got teh exclusives!!!!!

just as ive always said, the lineup is comparable, depends on what type of games you like.

No exclusives, no 3rd party games, no hardcore games, no AAA games...

*jumps in front of a train*

Metacritic isn't reliable due to the huge inconsistencies between each games position. This is not all Metacritic's fault, but the fact remains you cannot sensibly take their approach with some titles having 50 plus reviews vs others with far less and truly compare across titles. Not to mention trying to adapt different scores to their template plus the fact they include questionable sources at times.

Taking a game on Meta/Gameranking with say 90% with 50 reviews and saying hah, this isn't as good as a game with 92% and 20 reviews is simply flawed and actually rather meaningless.

Sure, it has credibility in that lots of people use it, and even the industry quotes it, but this doesn't stop it being wrong - simply accepted. As ever, having studied maths and statistics I just never fail to be astonished at the eagerness of the average joe to accept stuff because they need something to direct their choices and also enforce their beliefs.

In the end Gamerankings and Metacrtic exist as a 'better than nothing' option for those who want quick answers which are probably not entirely accurate but are hopefully close enough.

As ever, they are used to re-enforce existing bias for the most part in posts like this, in the most juvenile kind of cock waving around.

For the record both consoles have great libraries, the PS3 is arguable more eclectic overall but the 360 has plenty of variety too and probably suffers from having higher sales of core genres overshadow some of its own more eclectic titles, and nobody sane should be running out of quality games to play on either.

Now stop arguing the lot of you!

Thats impossible!!!!

The J man thought that developers like sony more....JUST ASK SONY!!!!