again, you're turning it into a math equation.  it doesn't matter how much you argue about true math and normalization, the fact remains, you're fixated on making 'average' be 50%, the only thing this strictly mathematical method would change is the average game score.  

If you want to make a thread about the numerical values given to reviews, go right ahead.  if you want to go through all the pain of "normalizing" existing review scores so that they fit this model, go ahead.  this thread has almost nothing to do with the math involved in normalized review scores.  I don't know why you insist on pushing that agenda here, especially since I've said time and time again that it doesn't NEED to be normalized in that manner, since review scores can be calculated any number of ways, with any chosen values, and everyone has their own methods.  You're getting too hung up on the numbers and are apparently forgetting what the numbers mean.  That's what really matters.  as long as people know that "80 means it's a very good game", that's what's important. 

Did you read what you wrote at all?

"The only way to be a successful game critic is to be as neutral as you can, and don't you dare give it anything more than an 8 or less than a 7, or fear the wrath of the internet!"

just because I made a vague and inconsequential reference to number grading doesn't mean it was in any way important to my point.  The 70-89 range is about average for major releases.  That's the extent of that point.  Talk about extrapolating.  This almost qualifies as a strawman fallacy on your part. 

And that's my point, why the fuck would you say 70-89 is mediocre when 40-69 exists?

ALso not to mention you then start talking about how you grade like old school (which is a damn lie otherwise there wouldn't be as big a skew) reviewers.

Because that's what gaming reviews have become. The system is broken but it's what has become standard so going against the grain and scoring a game that scores a 7.5 everywhere, a 5 when it means the same thing is pointless. It's not the number specifically as to what the number means.

you'd do well to refrain from cursing, it nullifies your argument regardless of how accurate your statements may be.  Just a word of advice.  

I don't recall saying 70-89 was 'mediocre', I said it was average for popular releases. Again with the extrapolating.  and again with the "why does it matter anyway?" 

Explain to me how I don't review like old school reviewers.  I talk about level design, I talk about difficulty curves, I talk about controls, I talk about fun factor and functionality.  I put gameplay first and foremost in my reviews, I always have.  How is that not oldschool?  just because I give a touch more lenience when it comes to inconsequential, infrequent glitches doesn't mean my assertion is suddenly nullified.  it's becoming increasingly clear you have an agenda.  Do us all a favor and take it over there, please. 

OP it sounds like you write reviews to please an audience rather then review games fairly.

Ideally I would like a game reviewer with similar tastes as me. Since I haven't found review sites that stick out I usually stick to metacritic to get a general sense of how the game was received.

Reviewing games must be tough though... I can't imagine you enjoy many games are you're forced to play them, especially some you never would have picked up otherwise.

Sorry, I curse so much IRL that it has literally lost all meaning and sometimes it slips into my written words.

Average IS mediocre... that's the definition of mediocre, average.  As to how you don't grade like old reviewers, I already pointed it out, back in the day scores were far better distributed than they are now. The simple fact you gave a game with glitches an 8.9 attests to that. I will be hardpressed to find a good old school review where a game with bugs got 4.5 stars. Your assertion is very much nullified, because you are essientially bitching about a system that you, and people like you, helped create, and my agenda was to point that out. What you call liniency, I call lack of integrity of a critic.

wow, you totally got it wrong.  like, 180 degrees bass ackwards.  I was complaining that I review according to what I feel is right, and people get bitchy at me for not conforming.  did you even read the original post or just glaze over it?  

I'm honestly at a loss for what to refer to this as.  I want to call you ignorant but you're clearly not that.  I want to call you rude, but that's entirely irrelevant.  I want to call you a hater but that just seems so childish.  So rather that shout curse words at you, I'll just say this: 

dude you need to get laid or something.  maybe do some weed or just go to a Jimmy Buffet concert, all I know is that you've got to chill right out and stop being so aggressive.  you're making mountains out of molehills, as it were (which is hilariously ironic since all of this was incited because I was accused of nitpicking things I felt were very important in a game's design.)  You're taking something small and inconsequentual and enlarging it to biblical proportions so you can use it as a launching pad to write a tirade.  this crusade about how 'average' should be here when it's there is honestly just getting silly, and your assertions that my integrity is compromised because I gave leniancy to a game with minor, infrequent glitches is not only false, but laughably so.  Your assertion that 'oldschool games with bugs would NEVER get more than an 8.5' is so hilariously wrong that I honestly don't even know where to start proving it so I won't even bother.  the fact is that every game has them, it's always just a matter of how much they affect the ability to play the game.  

I just, I don't know where to go with this anymore.  you seem like the person who could (and does) take small inconsequential asides and tirades against them endlessly just so you feel superior.  I've met your kind, hell, I've BEEN your kind in the past, and I have to say, seeing it from this end is just hilariously sad.  

If you're going to rant about my critera for grading games, go right ahead, but an overwhelming majority of what you've said on this thread has nothing to do with what this thread is about, and your complaints about 'average should be 50, not 75" is such an extrapolation of semantics that I Don't even know why you think anyone can take you seriously.  

This entire 'debate' if you can call it that has reminded me of some of the people on Fox NEws who can take a simple thing and sensationalize it into some sort of anti-american conspiracy.  Just calm down.  Seriously.  I don't even know why I have spent this much time reading your responses and replying to them.  what a waste of my time.  Go make your own thread and get out of this one.