I feel compelled to point out that not one of the Slys, Rachets, Bandicoots, and Sackboys were developed in-house either, and half the developers aren't even second-party today. This somewhat lessens (but hardly negates) the first paragraph.

nope

The point some are trying to make is that the underlined in the first sentence goes a long way towards defeating the second sentence in its entirety. As in, even if metacritic were in fact the "best" option available, its actual value is low enough to make that prize meaningless.

Which multiplats? If you read the OP you'll see I tried to make sure all multiplats above 80 meta were shown in each column where applicable, but I was a bit less careful about the 79 and below. I picked out a few of the obvious ones that were in the PS4 column and not in the Xb one column but did not do a comprehensive check.

You'll also note, if you read the OP that I mention Halo MCC, LBP and SSB as the big name games that are yet to come out. But as they are one game for each platform they won't change the over all picture at all, unless one of them reviews particularly badly.

Wii U b/c is worth considering when people are going to buy a console, if they don't currently own a Wii.

Metacritic is a poor way of directly measuring the quality of titles, and even worse for comparing them (especially when from different genres), but it's a pretty good method of objectively comparing the probable quality of something, especially on larger scales. Even with metacritic's fairly limited sample size, a game with a 70 meta can have multiple 9+ scores.

The 70 should be looked at as the most probable score that a generalize mainstream personality is likely to give it (within a certain degree), rather than an outright measure of quality (the latter being what most unfortunately use it for). To that extent, it's a useful way of objectively comparing two libraries, (though niche titles are always problematic, regardless of scale).

It's utterly useless on a person by person basis though. Generalized probabilities doesn't mean much when you add preference to the mix lol.

Anyway, the way the OP has done the list makes proper quality comparison pointless (for completely different reasons), but i think he's trying to demonstrate quantity. There are other issues with that, but a lot less than with the former.

Regarding my last post...

Worth clarifying that "It's a good reference" was referring to Wikipedia. Metacritic is something I really dispise, and I hate how people use it as "evidence" or "proof" in arguments. Just like how someone shouldn't use Wikipeida in an essay.

Sorry for the confusion.

Well, that's just it. All Metacritic tells us is what a few dozen publications thought of the game in question. It gives us a sense of the critical consensus. It doesn't tell us anything about a game's quality, because that is very much a personal evaluation. 

Metacritic is a collection of opinions, not unlike this forum. Sure, Metacritic collects opinions from so-called experts and industry veterans, but in the end those opinions are as rooted in subjective truths as our own. They simply have a byline.

To collect such opinions and present them as objective facts is misguided. 

Delusional people are delusional.

Irregardless of the various failings of metacritic, it's a better metric to use than some random dude posting in an internet forum. There are typically sufficient reviews in a metascore to cancel out various of the most egregious biases. It is particularly effective at negating the influence of the platform preference bias. And in that respect metascore is fairly objective. Platform preference bias can affect metascore by a few points, but the presence of platform preference bias in any given review cannot cause the metascore to alter all that significantly.

But to support your claim that weighted average of selected reviews is sufficiently problematic to make metascore of negligible value you'd have to provide evidence that the contributors to metascore are not a reasonable representation of critics in general; qualitatively or quantitatively. Taking a sample, and weighting the results in an effort to account for certain biases is not in itself a fatally flawed methodology. You need to show either sampling bias, or evaluation bias in Metacritic's methodology in order to show that the best option available is not beter enough to be worth using for any meta meta purpose.