I do read videogamers reviews. Their 100 to No Man´s Sky was fucking dumb and they made fun of themselves on their youtube channel when they did it. I dont see why their opinion is any less valid then others. They do throw around Higher scores easier. And tell you what the B2S and HR scores is what I´d rather them aswell. Again I think Beyond two souls is a huge confusing dumb game. The reactions for that game were mixed regardless. I dont see anything to discredit their opinion obviously the guy who publishes the articles on digitallydownloaded (Matt Sainsbury) enjoys David cage´s games he wouldnt publish a review he wouldnt agree with in the slightest now would he? He also tweeted in support of the writer of the article

Though a really neat game, Super Mario Odyssey is an utterly underwhelming adventure for every long-term Super Mario fan in existence. Unless Cappy brainwashed you. In that case, you are a satisfied zombie customer now. No, seriously, only a zombie would find a healthy challenge in this pleasant but disappointingly easy Super Mario Walk-in-the-park. Sorry - Odyssey.

The score was a 75 a fine score but look at the writing of that piece the piece he picked to throw on metacritic. It screams ´Click me´ just to piss off fanboys. You need to look at the text and the context of the review before you can call it a troll review. They decide what scores they give and if they were really out to get you with Detroid they would´ve given it lower then a 4. Do understand that Im really looking forward to playing this game since its been revealed I really hope its good and Im picking it up as soon as im back from vacation but I just wanted to defend that not all bad reviews are troll reviews even websites with a shitty taste. As an example I give you Armond White https://www.rottentomatoes.com/critic/armond-white/movies?page=1 Armond White reviews are so fucking mixed. He takes offensive to alot of shit. Doesnt make his opinion any less valid, If you like the movies he likes you probably follow his recomendations (Which I dont sugest anyone with a healthy mind does).

You gone to their review? I don't think so.

https://www.videogamer.com/reviews/detroit-become-human-review is 4/10 so it isn't a 5 point scale.

http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/2018/06/review-west-of-loathing-nintendo-switch.html they give half star as well, so another 10 point scale.

So your whole premise of they giving 5 point and based on how much they like the game (which isn't even a good way of reviewing games, I don't want to know if a reviewer like the game I want to see what is the game) is dead wrong.

And considering digitallydownloaded gave 9/10 to the game I gave the link I have very hard time accepting that this game is a whopping 50 points out of 100 better than Detroit.

Or that this game http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/2018/05/review-happy-birthdays-nintendo-switch.html is perfect and Detroit dwelves on the broken side of the scale.

Please keep defending that they were totally professional with both 40/100.

And no one is saying the average would change much (although it would keep the 80 it had), but that both are at troll level clickbaiting side.

Unless you can explain me with a straight face that giving 10 to HR, B2S and 4 for Detroit is justified because those are 2.5x better than it (and also NMS and other high scores for bad games) then no, I won't accept the validity of any review that gives score based on the person liking or not the game. That isn't how reviewing is supposed to be. You want to give your opinion on if you like a game you do an editorial, a review needs to talk about the game, what it try and accomplish. Not about what you wanted the game to be.

Well just look at their prior work. I'm not ruling out click baiting but that is the same has committing fraud. Yes, on Metacritic 40% rating means it's a bad game, but on their own scale 2 out of 5 could just mean it's a game they din't enjoy and they are not recommending it. 

http://opencritic.com/critic/577/colm-ahern

http://opencritic.com/critic/65/tyler-treese

Also, Different website use their own internal scale to rate games and Metacritic doesn't adjust their score base on these unique scale. 4 out of 10 doesn't always mean the same thing.  The review doesn't get to assign a metacritic score even if they are not using the same scale.  Reviewers don't review games for Metacritic, Metacritic use their score without consulting them. 

for example: I'll go back to 5 point scale because it's easier to explain.

Site could have internal 5 point scale has followed: 

Bad-OK-Good-Very Good- Excellent - Bad game is 20%
Broken-Bad-Average-Good-Excellent - Bad game is 40%
Unplayable/Broken-Flawed-Bad- Good- Excellent - Bad game is 60%

Its what they thought about the game. Their justified to their opinion just like everybody else. This really doesnt come across as a troll review to me. Its obvious you like this game alot so I´d just ignore their review entirely but the metascore shouldnt go up because you disagreed with their opinion. Its not a fact that this game is good its all opinions. This is a story heavy game if the story doesnt appeal to someone they shouldnt give it a review unless they see the value in what it has to offer to other people. It really seems they just thought this game was mediocore. They used a 5 point system so the metascore comes across harder then it actually is. 

As for the NMS review: 8 other people give it a 90+ whereunder Time, IGN sweden (99) Ign spain and Playstation lifestyle Do these publications lose credibility because they gave the game a high score? I Wouldnt know why. These are peoples own opinions. These arent click bait reviews because their review explain why they dislike it and they arent calling out people for liking this. I really dont see a problem with both of these reviews even if their opinions differs from what most other reviewers think. 

And I have explained to you that both sites uses half star, so it's effectively a 10 point scale so using a 5 point to excuse them doesn't work. And as I put in my answer to MCube, one of them gave 10 to HR and B2S (not same reviewer) so unless you can see reasons to consider both 2.5x better than Detroit they lack consistency.

Also as I also put, reviewers should concentrate most of their analysis on objective points, so when the game works good, have good sound, good graphics, coherent story, etc. At least average it should be considered (60-70).

I haven't played Detroit yet to say I'll like the game. But I know the type of game deserves a 40 (broken ones). We aren't discussing how these affect the average (since we already know it is no more than 1 point), but how much deviant they are and how they miss any consistency because both giving perfect scores for previous works of the studio (and as far as we know this one is better than the previous 2) but also gave perfect scores to shitty and broken games.

And again reviews shouldn't be about personal opinions. Unless you can say with a straight face that me giving 0 to Halo because I don't like FPS or to Zelda because I never cared much about it is justifiable.

And stop saying they use a 5 point system. They both give half point so it's effectively 10 points. So not using that excuse.

I want to see when you do a paper or work and it's scored 0 or even 4 because the one analyzing didn't like (doesn't matter if it was right or well done), since it seems to you is that how you fell matter the most. That is the biggest problem of this generation the "how I fell generation".

Forgot about them using half a star so you´re right on that one.

The scoring systems is a bit weird nowadays. A 4 is somehow seen as a broken game and a 6 is somehow a bad game game. THats not how you rate it. If a game is broken you give it a 2 or a 1. If you dislike a game you give it a 4. I dont see that when you dislike the game and you think the controls are crummy you somehow still should give it an above average score.

A review is someones personal opinion. A review shouldnt become this list with checkboxes on them and if it checks on all the boxes it should automatically get a 10. Its something that everyone has their own opinion about. You can have wiledly mixed perspectives on a game, movies and other type of entertainment. Im not getting what you want to advocate here. It´s starting to get further and further away from troll reviews and more about the thing you want Reviews to be. Reviews have always been someones personal opinion there is no other way to curate it. 

Your paper thing doesnt make sense. You dont have to follow rules when making a review there are rules when you have to grade a paper. There are requirements that have to be met with a paper there arent requirements when writing a review or giving your opinion about something. 

Man if reviewers really used consistently used the full scale I wouldn't have much issue with they giving 40 points to a working game they think isn't good. But on general the scales start on 5 for very bad games and average sits on 7 a 4 seems to low for this game (more comparing to their other reviews).

It isn't a checkbox, but evaluation on specific critereas. This was the norm until gen 7 at least.

Good reviews have a standard to follow. If you don't have coherence, consistency and standard them your grade is meaningless.

This is where you are wrong.... you said " But on general the scales start on 5 for very bad games and average sits on 7 a 4 seems to low for this game (more comparing to their other reviews)." Just look at Metacritic color scheme for game negative (red score) are rank 49 or less, Mixed (yellow) are rank 50 to 74 and Positive (green) is 75+. Review website set their own standard there no industry standard in ranking. Beside if you ask any reviewer they all say how they hate putting a score to a game. Because guy like you will only look and judge them base on the score and for the most part won't even bother reading the review (not saying you din't read the review). Sites analytic show that majority of people that come to check a review skip the entire article and scroll down and only look at the score.  

You even go has far as accusing them of click baiting and just disregarding their opinion because its not align with what you want to see. Video games is an art and it's very subjective and it will not click with all people. You even mention that the score need to be higher because the average 80, how would that make unbiased reviews if they had to use the average score to assign a score.