it generally gives an idea about how a lot of people are seeing the game. but saying an 85 meta scrore game is better than an 80 is wrong IMO. 

there is also a problem with reviewers. they always hide behind the " its just an opinion" line when ever they get any form of slack. and thus they have no form of objectivity when it comes to games. if a game is very niche, and targeted at a small portion of gamers, then most likely it will get shit reviews, because there are hunders of reviewers, and chances are, most of them wont be from the target audience the devs created the game for. the reviewers wont like the game, and give it shit scores, even though it might be very good at what its trying to be. ill use to the moon as an example.

IGN 75 score. "The story is good enough to recommend this game despite its relatively weak gameplay". well, fuck you IGN, To The Moon has very little focus on gameplay, in fact, its all about story. the game isnt trying to be a gameplay masterpiece, but IGN still takes away points because.. hey, i want every game to be what i want, not what its trying to be.

Thunderbolt 50 score "If you're into having your tears tugged at, this will definitely be a change from nights spent curling up on the couch spectating those romance flicks that no one else gets. If you're someone who winds up stuck with the aforementioned individual, originally promised beer and tricked into the awkward Kleenex duty, no guilt will be harbored from missing out." 

well a megafuck you thunderbolt. you basically say the game is great at what it sets out to be, but if you were promised a beer and a dude bro time, you will be dissapointed. well, you fucktards nobody promised that. they literally smited the games score because it wasnt what they wanted it to be, even though they say its great at what its trying to be. 

ill just give those examples, but my point stands, the game i thought about first was to the moon, and i never read these reviews before, but i knew To The Moon is a game that would have examples of what i was saying. if you havent played to the moon, its basically a 2d game in retro graphics that tells a love story. and its an awesome game. 

Metacritic is a joke, yeah, its cool when a game you are hyped for gets high scores, because if a lot of people like it, chances are you will. but if a game doesnt get high scores, doesnt mean its shit. 

Well I don't put any weight behind IGN's opinion anymore and I don't know the other site, but it is a common problem.  Generally I focus on the reviews of the people I like, such as Giant Bomb and Edge. The content of the review is always more important than the score itself anyway