This, I've heard mostly great things about BotW and I can't wait to finally play it for myself whenever I find the time.

Metacritic user scores have been terrible for years, Nintendo (and most nicher Japanese title) just used to be mostly left alone. Nintendo is a company like any other, and presented that made them look good. The context of that data doesn't really matter too much to PR.

Nope. I don't know why you jumped to that conclusion but that's not what the people are saying. I am actually getting tired of people twisting other people's words into something ridiculous to make them or their statements seem stupid.

As for the question of the OP. Again, nope. Meta user scores are trash. Simple as that. It's all a matter of whether trolls will set their eyes on a game. With wiiu they didn't see it as a threat but Switch seems to be doing well so they are targetting it through Zelda. Sad, just sad.

What is done in an educated way? User scores and their aggregation? I talk specifically about Metacritic user scores, as did Nintendo. The way they're done is known.

This whole entire argument (reviewers were paid off, BOTW isn't as good as they're saying it is bla bla bla etc.), in my not-so-humble opinion, is so obviously motivated by the fact that for years now, Nintendo have been the dogs of the online gaming community and now they have THE game of games exclusively for their new system... a system that those same online gamers were dogging and mocking and saying all kinds of bullshit things about. These types of people have egg on their faces, their pride is stolen... they look all kinds of stupid and they're trying in vain to not only convince everyone else around them that this isn't true but themselves as well.

The ego dies hard folks. It dies really hard.

If you use metacritic users scores to make a decision about buying or playing a game, you are a waste of a human being.

Those scores are trash.

I don't care about metacritic. It may aswell be labeled "fanboy wars and dubious commercial reviews critic".

I believe footage of games, i believe my experience in games and i listen to honest reviews i know, or i am familiar with their bias.

I still make the mistake of believing them sometimes, when they are pretty disonest cause i want them to be true. I think this fools alot of people aswell. Wich is why i have quite the disdain for commercial reviews and fanboysh hype reviews.

in my opinion, the games industry would be a lot more fun if metacritic and similar sites ceased to exist.

Both user scores and reviewer scores are worthless, everyone experiences a game uniquely, so many games have been passed up by people that would otherwise have probably tried it and liked it, and so many shitty games that scored well have made their way into gamers libraries only to never be played again.

I have absolutely never played a game that was absolutely perfect, so I immediately dismiss any 10/10 ratings. Similarly, I have incredibly seldom encountered games that are absolutely worthless, so I immediately discredit any 0/10 ratings unless it's a unanimous rating.

I think if every 10/10 and 0/10 were thrown out, what is left would mostly tell the tale to be quite honest.

My most favorite games throughout my entire life I wouldn't dream of giving 10/10 to. 9.5/10, sure. Hell, even 'Desert Bus' or whatever I'd have to rate a 2/10 just because it was so ludicrous that it made me laugh. A game would have to not even work at all to get a 0/10 from me.

Wait, what. Nintendo are often criticized, but still given nostalgic passes on many things for all of the marque titles. I don't see how anyone can perceive the Switch and its response as Nintendo having some giant moral victory over gaming communities.