nobody reviews the fun factor anymore?

Depends if you measure "content" in "time it takes to beat the game" or "amount of things you do in the game". Sure you may take a while to play through the game, but for a large portion of it, you are just playing through repetitive missions (with terribly designed, bullet sponge bosses) which all feel the same and are a perfect example of bad quest design...

yes as he bought into the hype,

i no, plus he says at the start of the review it was really fun i wonder if this guy reviewed the metal gear demo?

Not really...he was saying that people get pissed the game reviewer's opinion doesn't match their opinion and that thinking that reviewer's are supposed to be bias is BS. Like I said, he is coming from a different position, but if you thought that video was supporting your original post, you weren't listening.

If they did that you would end up with the modern day movie industry metrics for reviews, resulting in turds like Captian America and Lego Movie scoring high 9's and perfect 10's. 

no i said the start of it supported what i said average on metacritic, and i read the review while funny its off the point(as in i don't agree, but yes i get  the point.

Turds? Lol, come on.

The movie industry is way harsher with their scores though. While 7.5-8 is perhaps seen as "average" by gamers, a movie getting that score would be considered really really good.

How does one review for a purely abstract concept?

Two things of note to explain the 7.5 score. One is that the overall has never been and will never be an average of the components, we allow the writers leeway to decide how the components add up to an overall for a specific game for them. As an example To the Moon only amazing quality was in the presentation, but I still call the overall experience in the 9's.

2nd: Nick has been recently pushing for our site to switch to a score out of 20 instead of out of 100 as he thins out of 100 looks silly, this is why he went with 7.5 and not 7.3 or 7.7