Lovely bit of philosophy there, It is certainly what I do now but probably came about to that point the hard way!

By went away I meant perma banned and then unbanned by one of the mods =P.

Well before you were gone you were claiming the opposite.

Wait so you're saying that we should keep our expecations for a 20yr franchise at a low or "set" standard (by set I mean your bar applied to everyone because that's how this seems to work when we talk about "fair" even though the world itself and life is and never will be fair), but with a new IP we should be strict and unfair as ever?.

I'm confused because this game is laden with micro trans, has a really short SP campaign (that's not even out yet fully) and the MP has been suffering issues on both platforms. This again being a 20yr old franchise from the same company that should have learned the ropes well by now and even had "funding" from one of the big 3.

I notice the bias more with SP focused games and Sony exclusives like the Order or Infamous. Even in their own franchise I don't get the ratings. I mean Resistance 2 is the highest rated Resistance game for Christ's sake! Resistance 3 deserves like a 95 meta for being the greatest single player FPS ever besides maybe HL2. How the hell is it rated below the other two Resistance games when they had nowhere near as awesome of set-pieces, guns, and no upgrading ratchet and clank style weapons?

Fighting games are already limited by default. Its 1 v 1 and different stage backgrounds and usually the level designs have no effect on the game. Factor in the fact that their is hardly any single player modes in sf5 and multiplayer needs some fixing. Although, Im not too much into fighting games to be honest. Where in Titan Fall, it was a new ip that didn't have any known connection issues, dedicated servers, cool new gameplay mechanics and argubally the best fps multiplayer at its time. With street fighter, there is other competitors (mainly mk and kill instinct) that seems to offer more in some ways.

That's why I was confused at first.

Titanfall lost a lot of points for no SP and light content.

But Titanfall is a better game, so it still ended up with a very good score.

Wouldn't a better example of been the first season of KI? It scored like a 75.

Metacritic is just a average of what many different reviewers say. Just because metacritic says it's a good or bad game, doesn't mean you'll like/hate it.

Metacritic is less "definitive word" and more of a higher form of review. Reviews don't reflect the views of everything, and the same can be said of review aggregates. It would be thoughtless to say it doesn't matter at all- the same thought process could be applied to ALL reviews, and it would become difficult to decide what we should try out if there were no reviews on them. Most of the time, people who naysay do so for personal reasons (their favorite game was slammed, for example).

Take reviews and metacritic with a grain of salt, but don't ignore it. Keep in mind everyone has biases, but that not everyone acts on them. And always know what YOU like. It doesn't matter if that game got a 26 on metacritic- if you like it, then it's good for you.

This is the truth.  I used to manage and purchase content for a video store.  Several times a day I would get the question, "is this video good?"  However, if I answered that question, I wouldn't really be doing an effective job.  Instead, I'd try to answer the question, "would this customer like this video?"  If they were a regular customer, I could probably do that quickly, but with most people, I had to find out what other videos they liked and why.  For example, I'd look at the box they held up, ask how they felt about subtitles, they'd say, "I don't like the kind where I got to read," and I'd tell them to put back The City of Lost Children.  Reviewers can't tailor thier work lfor every reader, however. 

That's why some of the complaints I heard about subjective review scores sound kind of silly.  No one else, at least not a stranger on the internet, can decide what every reader will like.  A review is not the reader's opinion, it's someone else's opinion that's there for the sake of discovery.  

With most people, the first logical step is to find a reviewer who somewhat shares the same likes and dislikes.  Writers who do not share the same tastes are not wrong, they're just less personally relevent.  People who can't understand that without getting upset really shouldn't read reviews at all.

Titanfall is revolutionary for the shooter genre this gen, while STV is much of the same with V skills and a lack fo other content.

Edit- Also titanfall is a better game.