It depends, it's not always the case, i saw a lot of games with a différence like 74/80 90/80 because of the huge difference in the number of reviews , but anyway, the real score is the one with the most reviews for multiplatform, it would make much more sense, if he wants to put multiplatforms, to just take PS4 scores for both consoles since it's the real score ( except few multiplatform, the difference is never enough big to give a different score, it's never unplayable on X1 and the experience stays the same despite lower resolution/framerate./..)

Flower, Fez, Bastion, Diablo III: Ultimate Edition (same game, 4 point difference in favour of PS4), Shovel Knight (5 point difference in favour of PS4 despite being the same game), The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth.

Upcoming: Journey, GoW3: R, Uncharted Collection.

Seems like someone forgot the overrated indie games.

You can't possibly take metacritic serious, it's so flawed and biased. It's owned by the same company as Gamespot and they work with weighted averages (which simply means Gamespot's reviews count A LOT more).

The real average of Yoshi's Woolly World is 82%, but because of Gamespot's shitty review it's down to 79%. And we all know GS gives just about every Nintendo game a 6 out of 10.

Well your use of the word 'overratted' shows that your argument is opinionated. The top 2 of the 3 scores on Gamespots Metacritic page are Nintendo games.. Ocarina of time is sitting there aswell in the perfect score category. http://www.metacritic.com/publication/gamespot.

The biggest point here is that there are 80 more games to be counted into PS4's metacritic meaning there are more aweful games that would be factored in, and there are more reviews on the multiplat version of PS4's meaning the score could be higher or lower (probably average out to equal overal) to the xbox version.

You can downplay all you want but don't go to a Metacritic thread then bolster about how irrelevant Metacritic is when Nintendo use Metacritic for advertising campaigns. 

The fact here is that the PS4 has a higher average score of games playable on the console than the other 2 home consoles of the 8th gen. It's not by much it's only 4% nothing to get upset about.

can you use some other methodes? simple average doesnt say much and i guess you have the data somewhere.

What does Nintendo PR have to do with me lol? Do you think I made that Ad campaign?

Oh and GS has given perfect scores to more than just 3 games. They aren't listed from best to worse if they have the same score you know... Bayonetta 2 isn't made by Nintendo either.

Look at the amount of good Nintendo games they scored way below the metacritic average this generation alone, then we'll talk.

I didn't downplay, I gave you perfectly reasonably arguments and examples why metacritic can't be taken serious.

I just listed you a considerable amount of remasters/ports that aren't on xbone and scored way too high. But hey, if you think Fez or Bastion are better games than Arkham Knight...

Because Wii U had Sonic Boom. And Sonic games are crap now. The last good game on the series is Generation IMO (sorry sonic fan). 

I know they have and they've given nintendo games 100's. I know it's not made by nintendo but it's a Wii U exclusive. 

Fair enough you don't think metacritic should be taken seriously but this is a thread about data on metacritic so that's what we're discussing. It's like coming to a sales site and complaining about people talking about sales numbers.

Yeah because you can compare games of different genres with the similar scores..

Consumers don't care if a game is a remake or a re-master. I don't know why that point keeps coming up.

The average is also a pretty useless statistic. There are far better (and more complicated) options. I guess someone could start by making a boxplot of all 3 consoles.

maybe you?