I stopped really caring about Meracritic a long time ago. Tons of games I love dont have amazing Meta scores and some games Ive hated have been 90 or higher. All I really care about is if I enjoy it.

Because tastes can change? Because a game series can change? Just for example, I disliked Assassin's Creed, but I enjoyed Assassin's Creed 2. Another example, I really do hate Devil May Cry 2, but Devil May Cry 3 is one of my favorite games. Should the fact that I disliked the original Assassin's Creed and Devil May Cry 2 prevent me from reviewing subsequent iterations? Same thing applies to Halo. If someone disliked the past few games in a series, this shouldn't prevent them from reviewing the current game, because the game could actually correct the flaws that made them dislike the game.

I also don't want to get into this too much because its been discussed to death on this site, but the fact that something is popular or garners positive reviews does not necessitate that its of high quality.

I dont know.  

Probably because I know that halo 4 deserves so much more. But I havent played the game yet so I could be wrong. 

I'd second this. For the games I like, I could really care less about where their metacritic score stands. Often times, I even agree with the criticisms leveled against the games I like, but that doesn't prevent me from enjoying them.

that one review didnt pull it down from 90 to 87, its the reviews its been getting recently. of course a halo fan like yourself would like a halo game to get really high reviews thats understandable, but from what it seems halo 4 reviewers seem to agree on the 87 score as it is the avarage out of 61 reviews so far, one review wont make a difference. we shouldnt go mad because a game didnt get the score we wanted it to get. if reviewrs stop criticizing  games then whats the point? plus if the game gets a 1 meta score or 99, its gonna still be exactly the same game, and make no difference to you what so ever

Well, don't let this critic get to you -- he seems like a hack anyway. I guess maybe sometimes we get too protective of our favorite games. When GameSpot gave Skyward Sword a 7.5 I certainly looked at it sideways. The best revenge is buying the game, supporting 343, and logging dozens of hours on Halo 4 :)

Agreed. Many of my favourite games have scored around 6-8 mark.

I think you are missunderstanding me.

There's a difference between not liking something and fundimentaly hating it. You disliked Assassin's Creed but enjoyed it's sequel. That means that you like the fundimental things that make Assassin's Creed what it is, but the flaws of the first game turned you off. Did you really hate Assassin's Creed or just not enjoy it?

I'm not asking that reviews should be written buy fans. In fact I stated the oposite and said that hater reviewers as as bad as fanboy reviewers.

What I'm saying is that if someone truly dislikes the fundimental core of a series their opinion is worthless to those who enjoy it even in the slightest. Do we really need to hear that Halo should be like COD? I don't think so. The core Halo gameplay machanics are well loved and therfore are not total shit. A reviewer that ignores this because they don't like those machanics isn't doing their job. Actualy that reviewer shouldn't have even gotten the assignment.

They're just a bunch of fucking trolls. You should post the entire review in the OP so we don't have to give their website any hits.

It's also down to 87 on metacritic...fuck sake.

I don't know. Its difficult to define the fundamental components of a game. If I hated the FPS genre, I would say I shouldn't write a review for a FPS. Same thing goes for other genres. The problem here is that you are talking about sub-genres of the FPS genre. I think it is quite obvious that people can enjoy both types of games, so they aren't exclusive categories. If someone prefers one type over another, I don't think it should prevent them from reviewing a game from their less preferred category.

As to the bolded, I would disagree with that. I think someone who dislikes the fundamental core of a series can still provide some valid criticisms. I tend to like niche japanese rpgs, but reviewers don't seem to like them as much. I would also argue that, in some cases, they have a fundamental bias against these games. At the same time, I don't expect them to cater to my interests in disservice to the broader population of gamers. I also mentioned this in another post, but I often times agree with their criticisms, but this doesn't prevent me from enjoying the games.