This week has been filled with talk of how Street Fighter V had a lack of single player content and it has now sunk below 80% on Metacritic.

As we know SFV is a console exclusive, not unlike Titanfall a year ago. Although not of the same genre, Titanfall has many commonalities including a lack of content (Titanfall had a lack of both single player and many online modes) but both have been praised for their gameplay, animations and art direction.

Where the games differ most is how they have been received by critics, with only two mixed reviews  and sixtysix positive for Titanfall and eleven mixed (going as low as fifty) and 38 positive.

Last generation I spent the first few years on 360 and wouldn't really care seeing different scores based on small performance differences but in my eyes there seems to be a persistent bias towards harder marking towards PS titles. 

Having bought SFV for 70 euro, I am very happy with my purchase and rate it an 87 with possible upgrade pending content updates. 

Am I simply wrong? Am I seeing things through fanboy goggles? 

Tell me how you see it!

Though popular, meta critic is a bad metric for what you personally like. Find one or two reviewers that line up with your taste and go from there. Just ignore metracritic and leave it for the unwashed. 

Actually, if I'd trust the reviewers this gen, I'd never played Fatal Frame V, Pokémon Super Mystery Dungeon, Kirby: Rainbow Curse... Games that I really like. So don't mind about that, the important thing is that you're enjoying the game. But you have your rights to complain, I'm always complaining about reviews xDDD

Titanfall had jetpacks and mechs man... thats like at least 10+ percent... jetpacks!

Everyone is biased though, I mean before you went away for a while you had strict heavy bias towards Microsoft and saw then as being no different than some evil make believe company you read out of comic books.

Also TF was a new IP, Street Fighter has been around for a very long time along with the fact that it came out with performance and service issues since it's release. Titanfall as also shooting for it's multiplayer aspect, not it's SP and SF is known for having both for years (not to mention plenty on this site heavily vouch for SP content over MP and SFV lacks a lot of that).

I think that if it were a new IP SFV would have been praised as the saviour of the genre. Because there have been several amazing SF games, expectations are way high and they are harsh on it. I'm sure that the same thing would happen to Tekken 7 if it launched with similar issues.

Yes, it's not fair, but I don't think it has anything to do with Sony and MS.

Yeah, me too. Driveclub and Alien Isolation would be two for me!

Love that "went away for a while" LOL

I don't think their evil at all, in fact I think Phil seems like a good leader and decent person. 

New ips and shooters get higher scores then most.

Example: Dynasty Warriors rehashes every year (if that) gets very low scores. Cod rehashes every year gets high scores.

Roger Ebert once said the purpose of reviews is for the reader to decide whether or not he would like the product, regardless of whether or not the reviewer liked it. To illustrate his point, he was asked by some people in an elevator what he thought of a movie. Ebert said he thought it was a very intelligent, well crafted movie. "Oh thanks," said one of the people: "That doesn't sound like anything we'd like to see."

You're not seeing things through fanboy goggles. You're seeing things through BryanK75 goggles. No one at Metacritic has a pair of BryanK75 goggles. Only one person on the planet does; this is the person you should listen to the most.

Read reviews and scores and take them into consideration, but use your own past experiences and knowledge of what you like too. Just because you like something more than others doesn't mean you're wrong.