I have been routinely checking up on the metascore for MGS4 and it really appears as if whoever designates the choice of reviewers is clearly not FOR metal gear solid franchise.

There are countless 80 reviews but I remember seeing much more 90+ reviews than listed by metacritic. Also their latest edition is an unlinked review from a magazine that isn't even out yet and it is also an "80".

This is a very biased operation being ran here.

I agree with you, man.

Metal Gear Solid 4 has a Metascore of 96% so far.

I've been following the reviews for quite a while, I got all of them so far... or at least most of them. And they're as follow:

PlayStation Official Magazine UK: 10/10
PlayStation Official Magazine Dutch: 96/100
PlayStation Official Magazine US: 5/5
PlayGeneration Italy: 97/100
PlayStation Official Magazine Italy: 10/10
PlayStation Official Magazine US: 5/5
IGN UK: 9.9/10
EuroGamer: 8/10
GamePro: 5/5
GameMaster UK: 97/100
ComputersAndVideoGames: 9.5/10
GamesRadar: 9/10
Edge Magazine: 8/10
Hobby Consolas: 9.6/10
Famitsu: 40/40
IGN AU: 9.5/10
MeriStation: 10/10
PlayStation Beyond: 10/10
JeuxVideo: 17/20
GameReactor: 9/10
EmpireOnline: 5/5
GameInformer: 10/10
Level # 26: 10/10
PlayMania: 9.6/10
Chief: 9.7/10
Elite Gamer: 9/10
PlayerTV UK: 10/10
PlayFrance: 9.5/10

MetaCritic missed a lot of them.

i agree completely. ive seen over 15 scores from respectable magazines out for a while and none are posted yet they post ones from barely popular websites and magazines that arent even out yet.

also i dont get why they choose to use some sources for one game, yet on another game they dont use the same sources. why would they pick and choose sources for each game like this?

this is pretty ridiculous