Every gaming website has skewed scores if you look at it that way. You cant say "OMG BIOSHOCK DID AS WELL AS HIGH VELOCITY BOWLING!" Its much more than that. Its about value, pure fun, etc. If High Velocity Bowling is $10 and a hell of a lot of fun for that price and Bioshock is $60 with glitches and not exactly worth it, I would rate HVB higher than Bioshock.

NOTE: That was just a scenario to prove a point. HVB isnt $10 and Bioshock isnt all 'glitchy'

*cough cough*

I think the problem the OP has with the review system would be resolved if the precision of the scale was only integers. That way, he wouldn't claim this site pretends that Endless Ocean is better than Fallout because of only 1%.

That's great. No one "gives a hoot" about your mag. This is VGChartz. If you don't like it, get the hell off the site. I'm tired of your attitude, and I'm tired of you trolling every opinion different than yours as if yours is gospel and everyone else is wrong.

Put simply, if you don't like them, don't read them.

I take all game reviews with a pinch of salt. It is just someone's opinion. So VGChartz rated some differently to the status quo as indicated on the metacritc ratings.

I do not trust game reviews period. I have played some 90%+ average review score games and they totally sucked in my opinion. Virtua Fighter 5 and GTA IV both got 90%+ on metacritic and they were good games in my opinion but not AAA status. RE5 and Halo Wars, I played the demos - not impressed at all, they both got inflated review scores from reviewers.

VGChartz does its best to give fair balanced reviews on games. I however question some of the reviews on game review sites. Sometimes review score is contradictory to the review write up on the game.

Kylie, he's probably not just talking about your talking in the review sections.

And I want to clarify: even though reviews do go through content edits by our content editors, and they do have final say about what goes up and what doesn't, the ultimate question comes down to whether or not a reviewer justifies his score. Content editors don't enforce their own opinions about a game.

There isn't a larger consensus, and a reviewer (almost entirely) still expresses their own opinion about a game.

While I do enjoy most of the reviews, The GOW review turned me off completely, come on, it was reviewed by someone who hated the series to begin with and gave it a low score accordingly.

While i do think some are giving the reviews a bad rap, we must remember that it's a new and very promising feature to the site. I expect it to get better as times go by, and once in while we might get a stinker. It happens everywhere.

How far is it reasonable to take this logic, though? Once you really get into the criticism portion of a review, you get away from things that can be objectively measured, and expecting that out of reviews is unrealistic.

Apparently so. 

On the topic I think they have alot of refining to do, but it's still early.