when i say high, i mean 9.0/10 or better.  this could simply be me looking at the reviews for the wrong games, but it seems shooters, either third person or first person, are the only games i see over 9.0 anymore.  im not taking anyhting away from the other genres.  i dont let arbitrary rating systems influence my decision to buy a game all too much (i usually play demos to make a decision), it just makes me a little worried that the only games people rate very well are shooters.  i think the only non shooter games ive seen so far above a 9 this gen is god of war 3 and the two little big planet games.  it just seems to me that the other games arent getting the recognition they deserve.  i havent seen a racer, fighter, or even an rpg above a 9 anywhere.  maybe im just having bad luck while looking.

No.

Mario Galaxy 1 & 2: 97 in Metacritics

Grand Theft Aut IV 98 in Metacritics
Legend of Zelda Twilight Princess 94

World of Goo 94

Super Smash Brawl 93

Street Fighter IV 94

The Elder Scroll IV 93
And the list goes and goes

i think Tales Of Xillia will get a 9 and Forza 3 got a 92 on metacritic

i dont think so but theres alot of shooters these days so i can see why you would think that.

I think shooters scores are generally inflated. But they're not the only ones that get a 9

Erm Chaos Rings Got a 92 on meta. And that's an Iphone game!
Shogun 2 got a 90 on meta
Starcraft 2 got a 93 on meta

Really There's a lot more. And a whole lot teetering in the 88-89 range

The only game I agree with meta in the 90's that I've played is Mass Effect 2. Most of my favorites are in the 80's and maybe a couple in the 70's. It's not really relevant more of a guide that you have to decide what its worth.

Some 2010/2011 PC examples of 90 or above:
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/portal-2/critic-reviews
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/shogun-2-total-war
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/starcraft-ii-wings-of-liberty
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/world-of-warcraft-cataclysm
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/sid-meiers-civilization-v

but the most recent nail to the coffin of the already broken review system is not the shooter rating bias (which imo exists ever since Doom was released - but that's just me, the shooter hater), it's on a whole system.

A comparison where the real bias lies today:
On metacritic
- DS got 7 games with a score of 90 or above (and of course a GTA game has to be better than anything else, better even than the brilliant Mario & Luigi 3...)
- PSP got 3 (and of course the same GTA game is among those 3)
- iOS got 35 (!) and counting (the same GTA game is listed here as well, which is not really surprising anymore)

Now I haven't played an iPhone or iPad game yet and I could say that I'm glad that one of my all-time most favourite games is among those 35 (no, it's not said GTA game), but this is getting ridiculous.

I'm aware that the iOS average scores are based on fewer reviews than the DS/PSP ones, but still this is even way more ridiculous than the imo also often inflated HD console scores.

I will probably buy an iPad or Android tablet at some point, but I've never seen a gaming system where the review scores are so inflated across the board.

so lets look at the 90 rated games this year

Portal 2 95 PC Puzzle game

Portal 2 94 PS3 Puzzle game

Portal 2 94 X360 Puzzle game

Mass Effect 2 94 PS3 RPG/TPS

LittleBigPlanet 2 92 Platformer

Bug Heroes 91 RPG/Castle defence 

Dead Space 2 90 Survival horror/TPS

Shogun 2: Total War 90 RTS/TBS

now you could argue that Portal 2 is a game that is first person and involves shooting (portals) but I think we can all agree it's really a puzzle game.

So that leaves 2 shooters ME2 (and RPG with strong shooting elements) and Dead Space 2 for shooters and an agrument could be made for discounting ME2 as it came out last year and only the late PS3 port is reviewed here.

For non shooters you have LittleBigPlanet 2, Bug Heroes, Shogun 2: Total War and of course Portal 2

so that's 2 Shooters vs 4 non shooters, you could agrue there are more "shooters" than any other genre but since there are more AAA shooting games than any other genre that is not suprising.

I don't really see it TBH, that is not to say I don't think that the current review system is inherently broken and that all games have inflated scores, I mean currently a 70 is considered an average game (some even consider it below average) and there is something wrong with that, not to mention attaching an abetary score to reviews is questionable on it's own.

You sound guilty of being a shooter whore yourself : p   either that or you're living under a rock!  Plenty of non-shooters have scored above 90.

To name one fighter I play so often:  SSFIV

Whats worse is a lot of the shooters getting these 9's get away with having a mediocre plot, weak campaigns, and horrible writers who just use excessive cursing to make up for their inability to write good dialogue (Killzone 3, Gears).