Do the wii library, i'm betting the average is sub-65%

Interesting, would there still be 'nothing in it' if the Xbox 360 was slightly ahead? ;)

But, and i'll add this for the sake of it, since i used to be a reviewer in my youth (ps1 days) - I take metacritic averages with a titanic-killing grain of salt, since the general gaming media is about as unbiased as whipped boyfriends view of his girlfriend, the averages are brought down by sites trolling for hits, and brought up by reviewers who are fanboys of a particular system/genre/series.

So essentially, none of these numbers mean a damn thing.

That is what I'm saying after every yearly Metacritic report.

Unless someone points a gun in your face and forces you to play all the shitty games, an average Metascore of all games on a platform is completely irrelevant.
The quanitity of good games is all that matters. And if that number is very high, you probably won't notice the difference as you can't play all these games anyway.

If you'll notice, I've expanded the OP to include the number of games that got a green rating for each console and the average meta score, number of games that has a score of 85 and highter and the average meta score.

You can keep on claiming that this thread has no point, but from the figures, I can point out that the PS3 has more quality games with respect to total reviewed games.

Funny how people start calling scores and stuff pointless and meaningless when the data shows that the PS3 has a better track recored compared to the Xbox360. But when spin and nitpicking is introduced, much how many threads are made to make the PS3's games look bad, they go like...yeah, ps3 sucks... lol!

lots of hypocrites running around. But the truth of the matter is, without the spins and nitpicking and biased selections, the PS3 comes out ahead with a better library of quality games base on meta score.

PS3 has a better meta score percentage with respect to reviewed games in metacritic. PS3>Xbox360.

Nice to see you dismissing data showing PS3>360 but when its the other way around, your all like, YEAH ps3 sucks, x360 rules. Hypocrite.

Dood, Wii is dying, Wii U is sucking balls much like the Vita, Nintendo's only saving grace is the 3Ds which has been labeled a kiddie console by the haters... you really want to add to that? I personally would rather not.

So let me get this straight xbox 622- ps3 501 games in the green. Sounds like xbox with over 100 games in the green wins in a landslide!!!!!!! I know this was meant to make ps3 seem better by lumping poor scores with good scores but by looking at the top good games xbox by 121 omg!!! Now just another reason that xbox is better, and of course wii and xbox have the most shovelware because they sold the most and had more popular ideas to try new (crappy)games on-kinect/wii mote.Congratulations you made the 360 sound better because people will buy the 622 good games not the bad ones and lets face it ps3 is 121 games short!!!!

I'd prefer to see a comparison of just retail games, not XBLA and PSN ones. I suspect the results would be similar, except the number of games would be equal for each console. As far as I know XBLA has many more games than PSN.

Basically, these comparisons show that each console is very similar, including the Wii in regard to critic reception and serve no purpose. Fans arguing about a percentage point or two are just pathetic.

This is the only stat that matters (a bit). Going by numbers, the X360 has more appealing games. Mediocre and shitty games just don't matter, cause you wouldn't buy them anyway.

Reality is, it all comes to personal taste or which console has the most appealing exclusives for you. In my case the PS3 wins clearly, if I was a robot I'd pick the 360, it has more good and great games ;)