For once I agree with you, there's no need for him to be so sensitive and for the record i agree with your meta prediction.

bucause it's not just (A+B)÷C

Metacritic weights review scores. 

For example IGN has much more weight than a random reviewer that not very many people know.

Thats exactly what I believe too. But when it had like 43 reviews, UC3 was at 93.94!!! And with IGN giving it a 10, and Gametrailers a 9.5..
It was rounded to 93 until another review came and put it slightly above 94.

The f..

The only reason it keeps going down to 93 and up to 94 is because its going around 93.90 -> 94.10 which should all be rounded up to 94!

Yup, pretty much this. with over 40+ reviews, a single review shouldn't be able to just bump it up 1 whole point from 93 to 94 even with weighted average. This proves that Metacritic is roudning the score down for U3 and not up. So even if their wieghted average is 93.98, it'll be rounded down to 93. Well, thats what I've observed up to this point.

Now as per their claim of weighted average, the weight would most logically be dependent on the sights popularity, traffic ranking or such. Now the reviews in Metacritic can be sorted in terms of activity or how active the sight is, clicks, score and by site name.

I tried ranking the review sites with regards to activeness base on Metacritic's sorting and when getting the weighted average, I get a 94.xx, now we know that before the last 2 reviews were added, Metascore was at 93. So i removed the last 2 reviews added (AusGamer and Guardian) and did a weighted average using the ranking base on activeness and I still got a 94.xx

I then tried ranking base on clicks, again removing the last two reviews to see if i can get a 93, but no, I still got a weighted average of 94.xx. As comparison, averaging the score without the last two reviews will yield an average of 93.95

So base on this, Metacritic most probably has a preset ranking weight for each review site regardless of what their site shows as to which is clicked more or which is most active. The only issue here is that they have injected a lot of new review sites in U3s review that are not listd in U2. Adding new sites is not that easy as they would have to reconfigure their weights again and again and again which is too time consuming and unnecessary. Either these new sites are assigned very little weight, they have some crazy huge ass master list of sites which is very unlikely but still possible or their just full of crap and are lying about the weighted average and are just straight out averaging shit.

This is just getting embarrassing now. Clearly the game needed more time in the oven. If it goes down to 93 one more time, I'm canceling my preorder.

Im waiting for those 27 UC2 reviews to come for UC3 :(

BigPond GameArena-95/100

Metascore 94 - 50 reviews

Good topic man!!

Your avatar is so unnreal!!!