The X axis is unlabeled and unexplained, the methods used for selecting games is undisclosed with the exception of top 10 chart, and in general there isn't enough information given to do anything but guess what its trying to say. So in essence we are left to take it on good faith that the graph has meaning.

But beyond all of that they are review scores and as I pointed out review scores are worthless unless you have the exact same tastes as the reviewers....considering metacritic is a composite review score its pretty much guaranteed to that the scores aren't born out of your tastes.

I'm not trying to be mean here but there are flaws beyond just my disagreement with the review scores.  The effort was well-intended I'm sure but the result isn't that great to be brutally honest.  With some adjustments it probably can be made useful but that would just get passed the technical issues with the graphs and we would still be left with the subjective nature of the data. 

Which is really the point. Lots of subjective data does not create objective data.  It is still subjective and by that virtue alone the data isn't meaningful unless you share the views and tastes. 

Unless you're iterested in buying the entire library of Wii games, I don't think comparing how well a system's games does based on arbitrary(and sometimes biased) reviews should in any way alter the fun a person has with his or her system of choice regardless of which it is. I think people shouldn't be forced to justify, compare, or defend scores for games reviewed by people who work at companies that get ad money from people who make games. Enjoy the great games that are out there now without tying yourselves up in knots about what game scored one point higher on Metacrtic. Life's too short to sweat the small stuff, and this is pretty small. Please don't take this as criticism. Be happy. This message brought to you by Sprunk.

Told you so.  

Good reason to own a PS3.

I think I figured out the graph.

Y axis is definitly Metacritic score.
X axis seems to go from game to game down the list of games in score order. So for the Wii it should start with Galaxy, then Zelda, then Brawl and so on. I don't think that every single game is included, however.

In my opinion, it just shows how ill equiped traditional reviewers are for reviewing casual content. It seems like Wii games are getting an automatic 10 point deduction (on a scale of 100) just for being casual, or not HD, or both.

Just look at Wii Sports (76) and Wii Fit (80). These two titles are probably the biggest revolution in gaming since the transition to 3D, yet there is not a whole lot of love from traditional reviewers. In the meantime, the mainstream media and public can't get enough of this stuff.

Sort of how movie critics hated on Star Wars, because it wasn't Easy Rider or The Godfather. Not saying those are bad movies, just pointing out the critical discrepancy. 

Wow, naznatips and some of the rest of you need a serious lesson in chart-reading.  What is the average age here, 15?  Take a statistics course or two, folks. 

"If that graph were true, the Wii would have less games of every review score, including the bad ones."

LOL!

To make a self-evident comment that is a borderline tautology:

EVERY ONE of the six consoles has... 100% of games... on that console.  The actual number of games per console is irrelevant (as long as it's a decent number and not just a few games, in that case there would be sample size problems).  And it's looking at every game with a review score rating, not a cherry-picked list (speaking of the first chart). 

The bottom is percentile.  Kind of like, say, a ranking by percentile for exam grades ("leoj's SAT score was in the 35th percentile"), or Gini coefficient, or many other graphs that are "true"...

Not surprisingly, it's explained right in the original post:

"1% of games increments across the bottom"

There are currently 200 Wii games with ratings, so if going by whole percentiles, "100%", or the 100th percentile, would be Super Mario Galaxy (97) and Zelda (95), so a score of 96.  0% would be Balls of Fury (19) and Anubis II (19), so a score of 19.  Wii is 96 at 100%, check, 19 at 0%, check again.  Well then, that settles that.

"Seriously do you people just look at any graph and assume it as meaning?"

Unfortunately, the only "seriously" here is that you are seriously embarrassing yourself.  That other folks such as Mr"stat"ball were able to look at the graph and find its meaning should have been a clue...

To quote George Lucas on Star Wars, from the back of the book "Easy Riders, Raging Bulls":

"Popcorn pictures have always ruled.  Why do people go see them?  Why is the public so stupid?  That's not my fault."

To quote George Lucas on Star Wars, from the back of the book "Easy Riders, Raging Bulls":

"Popcorn pictures have always ruled.  Why do people go see them?  Why is the public so stupid?  That's not my fault."