"Phew... You where almost a Jill Sandwich!"

I'm ok with this. A few more of these and maybe people will stop seeing anything under an 80 as 4th rate trash.

still getting it

Train wreck said: gooch_destroyer said: Now I'm worried about Bloodborne. Gameinformer: Bloodborne score: 65 + pretty graphics - Game plays too much like Demon Souls - game is too hard, etc

Makes sense.

Another game which got a bad reviews for the wrong reasons.

C'mon, this is Resident Evil 4 meets Silent Hill!It should havse super high reviews. At least IGN had a good score for it.

Finally a challenging game emerges not another generic mediocre games that literally plays itself.

By the way, I just have a little thing that I say in regards to death in horror games:

"Dying isn't scary, it is the fear of death that keeps you on the edge of your seat."

Games should try to bring you close to death and tease you with death, but if a game kills you too often, it stops being frightening and starts being tedious. This is amplified when you feel cheated by the way's the game kills you and reading the only review that I care about so far (Jim Sterling), it certainly sounds like it could get tedious fairly quickly.

Did not play it but the reviews sound fair? Some complain it being like a ten year old masterpiece but the problem is that it is not better than those ten year old games + some call it too hard but if it is challenging I am fine with it but if it is unfair hard I would score it also low.

Why not ignore Metacritic's metascore and pay more attention to the reviews that really hold weight? Polygon? You know they are in it for the clicks. IGN is dubious sometimes, but they at least give more effort to their reviews.

Ignore the metascores and choose the reviewing website you trust the most. That's it. It would be better if there was a site that allowed you to choose the reviews you care about and create an average out of them.