When you see how PS3 Skyrim  being on a then 60m userbase was not enough of a reason for the dev and publisher to even try to optimize the game then you know what to expect from devs when its about a sub 10m userbase.

And according to vgchartz it sold 5.31m   so it shows that the dev/publisher did the right decision by not optimizing the game. If the userbase buys it regardless of quality they deserve a even worse  next installment of the series.

Thank god Wii U will not get any 3rd party game anymore, it shows which console has really quality gamers.

OT. I would like the last gen threshold to be lowered, and reviewers to using more marks from the scale how it pretty much should be. Mediocre game should get a 5, now a 5 or below usually means an almost unplayable turd. So I look forward to it, but I still think we'll get back to the old ways.

It would also help if games get seperate scores for multiplayer and singleplayer. Its two diffent things.

I mean a shitty campaign  will not do a good multiplayer game any justice when it comes to the final score  (and vice versa)  people will just see 7/10 (which as you said should be like 5/10 instead) and think the whole game is a 7(5)/10.

That's a good call. BF4 has an amazing multiplayer, no doubt. But the SP was shit, and broken to add to that. Yet the game scored in the high 80s, unfairly imo. And a lot of reviews mentioned that single is crappy, don't bother, jump right to multi and still gave the marks they did.

Yeah, it's always like this in the beginning of a generation.