The 8 year old telling the 7 year old to grow up.

OT: I disagree. The guy has a different opinion than most. So what? The problem is that people care so much about this shit for some reason... His opinion doesn't match the majority?! Burn him!

I almost forgot about that 2/10 for Halo 4. And people used to think Jim Sterling's reviews were bad and void of objectivity.

I suspect they will review God of War Ascension and give it a 30 or 40 to drop its metascore below 80.

It is only one guy reviewing all these as far as i am aware.  But some of his higher rated games includes Penball, Bruatal Legends, Xenoblade, and The Darkness II.  All of these games scored a perfect 100.  No flaws in any of these games but Halo 4, Starcraft, and Jouney is just garbage in this guys opinion

I agree. They just give reviews to get hits, period. It's ridiculous.

I don't think it's unreasonable for metacritic to start removing the highest and lowest score. Anyone giving a game a perfect 10 or 100/100 would be taking the chance that their site would lose out on the hits they get through meta's links. IMO no game has ever or will ever be perfect.

Conversely there has been a noticable trend to be the lowest scorer on any given game. Reviewers on small sites may be waiting to see the lowest number in the initial rush of reviews before picking a number. Remove that lowest score and the incentive to deliberately troll is gone. One review that is 40-60 points below the mean has more of an impact than it deserves.

Have a link available with the names and sites of the most extreme of the outliers. Not a direct link. More importantly don't put their site name on the front page and don't count the scores in the average. I never read the most extreme reviews anymore but something needs to be done and you can't start removing sites because they disagree with the norm.

Just to set up a straw man here, if the counter-argument is that they really felt strongly about the game then they, as writers of integrity will continue to do so. If they're trolling for hits or deliberately trying to sabotage a particular IP, genre or company because of pre-conceived bias they may think again.

It's okay. We need reviewers like Quarter to Three to remind us that Metacritic should not matter very much,

Hes either getting paid for racking up a quota in hits or hes an arguementative arsehole who does it for a reaction... which leads to more hits and therefor more rupee's.

Normally I wouldn't care for some random review, but when these reviews severely bring down the overall Metacritic score....it's a problem. Especially when these reviews are so poorly written.

This was my analysis of the reviewer. Don't confuse my statements for caring for his opinion. I don't care about metacritic at all tbh.