People are complaining about the lack of standards, clarity, transparency and consistency of a given reviewers scoring. Which is a perfectly legitimate thing to discuss.
I didn't play MW3, probably never will. Not my thing. But most reviewer point it has its flaws, but the overall MP experience is still as fun as the last, so if that's your thing, it's a 9/10. No complaints. That i a legitimate way to review the game.
But to then hold double standards and say that MK is a 5/10 because its the exact same game... when you just gave MW3 a 9/10 with out criticisng it for being the exact same game.... and thats your only real complaint? It's points to the reviewer either being bought and paid for, or being absolutely terrible at their job and completely irrelevant going forward, because his ratings seem entirely arbitrary and inconsistent.
