How many hours a day do you spend here?

Personally, I see this as a positive change. Game reviews have always seem to be very generous. In a perfect world, a 5-6 would be an average game, but for games even an 8 is considered poor.

If video game reviews were to be taken seriously (I would encourage no one to take them as such) one would believe that 15-20 genre defining masterpieces are produced each year, and that is simply not the case.

The fact that so many games get 80+ meta scores makes the entire rating system rather pointless. Isn't the value of game reviews suppose to lie in their ability to single out great or horrible games? If everything gets the same 8-10 review score with very few exceptions, then don't these reviewers kind of lose their raison detre since, apparently,  every sgame is spectacular which means we don't need a reviewer to tell us this anymore. 

So the congregate average of a few dozen dudes with, maybe, a degree in journalism who play a lot games...that's the end-all, perfect metric of a game's quality, right?

Shit's all subjective, and most people know that, so why obsess over something so meaningless? A game's metascore is not how good it is, it's not a contest, it's not anything.

Stop making mountains out of molehills.

Seriously, what's the big fu&%$ng deal!?

It's expected. Same thing to an extent happened to Gears 3, which was the best Gears IMHO. A third title in a franchise that's grown huge often (not always) gets lower scores as some reviewers move into nitpick mode.

Batman is likly to be this years Uncharted 2, a game seen as making a big leap from first release to second and also a new IP for the generation. You can see with Batman, as with Uncharted 2 before it, that even where reviewers nitpick they are not translating that to the score. Uncharted 3 won't get the same treatment. Gears 3 didn't and it's nothing specific to Uncharted, just a commom pattern you see in the industry.

There are of course exceptions to the rule, but I wasn't expecting Uncharted 3 to match Uncharted 2, even though reading through most reviews (including the 8s) it's seen as a better game.

Timing and market position plays a part in getting above 95% on metacritic and this year that timing is and market position is with Batman (which is bloody great BTW).

There are some stupid reviews, such as the Eurogamer one where he complains about the things that made Uncharted 2 great, a game they gave a 10. You also have to consider that he considers Dynasty Warriors Gundam 3 and Red Dead Redemption to be as good

But of course, I feel that expectations were very very high after Uncharted 2 basically being the 3rd or 4th best game of all time, and so even if it is improved, it was not as much of an improvement as some people hoped for (I am not sure how it could be any better). Also, I wouldn't put it past some websites to go for a lower score to get some extra page hits (maybe that was what Eurogamer were doing especially after their redesign)

yeah i dont get why people are making a big deal about this? From the reviews ive heard so far id say they are justified (most of them). I mean complaining about a 93 meta ? Seriously? Doesnt make sense in any way.

Most people here are saying that Uncharted 3 is a better game than 2. First of all most of you guys havnt even played the game! And secondly, if a game isnt a massive improvement over the previous one, then its justified to get less or the same based on the review criteria. Some gaming sites clearly explain this in the criteria.

Reading the eurogamer review i felt it should have atleast get a 9 though, they focused on complaints that they didnt focus on with U2 (which is silly cos they have the same "flaws"). I guess they were expecting a major change in the game structure...which was never gonna happen. Other than that i thought it was a good descriptive review.

What i dont understand is how some gaming review sites give a franchise like call of duty, constantly high scores. But then again it seems to be harder to get a high score in a single player driven game.

Didn't take long for one of these threads to show up

What are you gonna do if the metascore drops another point?? (usually does with time)

http://translate.google.com.au/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.gamepro.de/test/spiele/ps3/action-adventure/uncharted_3_drakes_deception/1971961/uncharted_3_drakes_deception_p5.html&ei=dX2mTqmUH8OuiQeFurCmDg&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CB4Q7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.gamepro.de/test/spiele/ps3/action-adventure/uncharted_3_drakes_deception/1971961/uncharted_3_drakes_deception_p5.html%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1366%26bih%3D575%26prmd%3Dimvns

94/100

uncharted 3 needs a 95 or higher to get back to 94 metacritic i think

edit

http://translate.google.de/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.play3.de%2F2011%2F10%2F24%2Ftest-uncharted-3-drakes-deception-inkl-video-der-dt-version%2F

9.5/10

let's see if this will count towards the meta uncharted should go back up to 94 soon

No point in guessing what the next review coming can do for its metascore, it has another 50/60 reviews to come, which usually never heighten the metascore, only bring it down, or rarely stabalise it (if it's 90+) unfortunately.