this.

OP uses 50 as the "average" then he uses a comparison to school grades where a 50 is a good hard F. I have no issue with a 60 being a bad score and anything below terrible. The review system like Captain Yuri stated is baded of the ABCDF scale we all know from school.

A- through A+ = 90-100

B- through B+ = 80-89

C- through C+ = 70-79

D- through D+ = 60-69

Anything below a 60 is an F.  Ya a 55 is better than a 25 score but you still dont want it either way. D game does something right and it is the stuff you like you might try it. A C game does alot right but have a bunch of minor flaws or a few big ones. B games do just about everything right but does is just a little off in a few areas. Once you get over 90 its a mater of ticky tack stuff. Maybe one minor flaw keeps a game at low 90s as opposed to mid 90s.

why is that stupid. If the test was easy and a 90 was only an average grade compared to other performance why is that a bad system. Would you prefer a system that allows for everyone to get a 90+?

oh, I did not realize they did it within each class there. Most of my classes they agregated the scores between classes and if the test did not change they kept the scores.

As others have said above, it does seem that some review scores seem to follow school logic where a low 7 (70%) would be considered average or adequate.
It seems like 5/10 really never means average in most video game scores and reviews. It typically is the bottom threshold for "check this game out after some consideration".

The largest problem of all is that different scores mean different things over various publications. To IGN, a 7 means decent whereas to some other sources it is considered good.

Thanks for the good responses everyone!

No, my analogy was University bell-curve grading, where the pass/fail mark is not static. Your place above/below the average is dependent on the state of everyone else's place. I posted that as an analogy to get more discussion, but when I talk about it more, an archetypal/baseline game to compare others to would be a good idea.

A lot of them were used to games that just didn't work growing up so maybe that's why they're so generous now. Oh wait now all of our games aren't working either...well at least we can patch now.  Oh wait they review them before then and still give them the high scores

you are comparing 2 different things. A bell curve placed on an objective test and a score that is completely subjective. For instance I have never seen a bell curve used on Research paper grades.

I know I am comparing different things lol the point was to generate discussion. You're right; the closest any research paper I've written has come to being objective is through marking by a rubric.

Why did they rate unreleased Witcher 3.....