I'm sure you've heard about the controversy caused by no-name websites giving low scores to Halo 4. If you haven't go back and read that last sentence and you'll know enough to get by.

Metacritic seems to allow bottom of the barrel blogs equal placement aside websites with at least a shred of journalistic integrity. I think the fatal flaw of Metacritic is it is too broad and takes into account too many little websites that may just want to trump up traffic. A big website like IGN or Gamespot will assign a review best suited for the job. They aren't going to give a the latest Madden to someone who hates football. They are going to pick the person with the most sports and sports game knowledge to do the job.

So I propose an alternative and I'm going to use Halo 4 as an example. Let's just use the top 10 review websites. I'm going to make up a list. You can argue for or against, but I'm not going to include any platform specific websites like OXM or PSM.

Ok, here's the list and scores:

Halo 4

98 ---  IGN

90 --- Gamespot

90 --- Game Trailers

78 --- Gamefront

90 --- GamesRadar

91 --- 1Up

92 --- Game Informer

100 --- Joystiq

100 --- Destructoid

80 --- Giant Bomb

Ok, so let's do a little simple math. With a possible total of 1000 and an actual total of 909 it comes out to an everage of 92.33%. That is, If my rusty calculation skills have held up since I fell asleep in high school math.

Metacritic has Halo 4 at 87% right now, but respected editorial says it's 90.9%. Which number do you think is a better estimate of Halo 4's quality?

What do you think? Is there a better review website than one listed? Is this even a good idea? Should I buy a domain and get started? Should I give up gaming altogether and find a new hobby? You tell me.

EDIT: Updated for new reviews and reader suggestions.

nah it's only flawed until the next ps3 exclusive comes out and gets a low score, then it'll be totally legitimate again just wait, give it time

I get where your coming from and for most people your right the big websites are the most important scores. But like any kind of aggregate this method has its flaws as well. Either way its clear is an amazing games thats being hurt by a couple reviews that are WAY lower than the consensus. Usually I dont say a website is trolling but with Halo 4 theres 2 reviews that just strait up are

metacritic actually has Halo 4 at 87% now.

Cant you just accept the score? please?

This

I hope that after 50 reviews. Metacritic should have a standard deviation. Then get the outliers out of the calculation. Ten we will know the true mean. (Average score) 

Fixed.

Is metacritic flawed? Yes.
Is your system better? No.

I mean, what's your scientific calculation that those are the 10 biggest review sites?

Metacritic is a flawed but better system, they just need to kick some sites off their accepted list, trolls like qt3 being one of them (Having read several of their reviews).

I appreciate the sentiment here, I really do, but I don't think this is the answer. Aggregate scoring sites like Metacritic will never be perfect, but I think limiting input to only the biggest and most read review sites would be a mistake.

My suggestion has always been to find two or three reviewers you trust, and follow their reviews. Odds are they will recommend games you'll like.

In any event, Metacritic has become something of a monster. When publishers started linking developer bonuses to Metacritic scores, things went sideways fast.