are they legit? never seen them on Meta before, but i'll add it to op

GG Smash.

It definitely has a fantastic shot at 90+. If it misses that target, it will only barely miss it. A couple of asshole reviews can still ruin it though. It happened with MCC, which got five 75 and under reviews. Right now we're seeing the people who haven't tested the online but put out a review anyway. If that online isn't completely flawless, this metascore is going to come crashing down when a few assholes looking for any reason to give a bad score say "See! We waited for the online to be finished like good reviewers, and the online had flaws! But that's the only part that matters, so it has to be perfect! Here's a 60!"

If I trusted reviewers not to be assholes, I'd be predicting a 92-93 as well, putting it on par with Rayman Legends and 3D World, the best scores on Wii U. But I don't, so I'm just waiting for the online to be done, the reviews to flood in, and the score to lower to an 89, just above Mario Kart 8.

Go Go?

Well, isn't this a good start.

Complaining about the lack of story mode, which is a very silly reason to deduct points in a fighting game. He's going to complain about a lack of story in Fifa next?

Subspace was the worst part of Brawl

May as well wait until it's posted to Metacritic, which it currently isn't.

Yeah I checked. They have a metacritic profile.

And he compares it to 64, which didn't have one either.

How are they 'assholes' for giving a lower score when half the game isn't functioning as advertised? I hope it becomes a more common practice. DC and to a lesser extent MCC's launches were unacceptable. If SSBU ends up in a similar situation, it deserves every bit of shit it gets for it (though i'm not expecting it to have any major issues).

It's because we never previously criticized publishers for releasing unstable or unfinished products that it's become such a common practice; they think they can get away with it. That's something that needs to change.