Have you ever noticed that, with occasional exceptions, the "triple A" games released by the big publishers always end up with generally favorable review scores? And that the more unconventional, quirky games, and those released by smaller publishers are far more likely to wind up with "mixed" review scores? Ever notice flawed-but-deeply-brilliant games scoring lower than big budget, generic clones? Ever notice user scores significantly lower or higher than a metascore?
Why do certain games tend to get higher or lower scores? What thoughts tend to run through a reviewer's mind while they're playing a game and writing a review, and how does this influence the overall trend of the metascores? More after the jump.