Do review scores really matter in the end?

Only if you want them to

>>381675457
Bioshock:I has a meta of 96, you think?
Who cares about review scores, did you liked the game?

Review scores are good for telling you which games to avoid, i.e. games with absolutely abysmal reviews.

Whether a game is 87/100 or 94/100 means absolutely nothing.

File: 1488967587786.jpg (46KB, 1440x900px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 1440x900px

>>381675457
does anything?

In all honesty, no
Most game journos are incompetent morons who got rejected from being journos for news sites who can't play games and have no passion for the industry, so they shower praise to shallow garbage that either fits what ever quotas they have at the current time or have marketing campaigns fueled by hype

>>381675457
Matters about as much as anyone's opinion on whether it matters or not.

"wow, i sure did enjoy this game because of the review score"
-Nobody

>>381675457
If you parade the fact that Zelda has a 97 then you cannot disagree with any other score on the website or you're a hypocrite

New zelda is just as mediocore as hzd

>>381675752
So fucking true. People need learn that you don't always need the hivemind's approval to enjoy something.

>>381675457
They matter the least when they're all piled up into one single number.

Reviewers are mostly shills at this point, intentional or not. When you're uncritical and cling to stupid trailer-trash game culture, everything out of your mouth is an ad.