Comparing SFV with Titanfall is wrong. Like Loudicrous Speed says it should be compared to Killer instinct which got a 73 rating.
Another good example would be Ryse(60 metascore) and The order(63 metascore). both had great visuals and bad gameplay.
In both cases PS exclusives are getting better scores so that pretty much proves there's no bias against Sony.

Killer instinct got an 85 on metacritic. http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-one/killer-instinct-season-2

Isolation is the worst offender, yeah. Best survival horror game in a long time, and definitely it didn't get what I think it deserve. It's important to emphasize "what I think". Reviewers nowadays don't fit my tastes, so it's not a valid metric for me. 

I never trust reviewers. Anyone just follow their gut feeling?

one is a new IP that was known from the start to be a multiplayer shooter, the other is the 5th main line game in a critically acclaimed series, which lacks many features that previous games in the series had.

Pretty obvious why SFV was rated lower.

Not obvious when I am playing it, which has been every night since release. 

It has Story mode (Short and sweet), Survival, Training, Practice, Lobbies / Lounge as well as casual and ranked matches.

If people can't get their heads around why it doesn't have an "Arcade mode", the fact that it hasn't had an arcade release might give a hint. 

Is it a type of mental infelxability to comprehend a fighting game without an Arcade mode even if it is just for 3 months...?

Is it ? 

Didn't realise you had everyones mind made up... :P

Just go with your gut. Many games I've loved got not-so-good reviews because technical stuff that to me didn't make a difference.  That's normal. 

Excuse me for having an opinion. sf4 is a lot better.

I prefer SFV by a wide margin, I also dont think there is much to divide them content-wise. That would make much difference to me anyway.