Giant Bomb review scores ranked by Metacritic

Metacritic has exposed some publisher and reviewer score history listing the companys' average score and how they compare to competitors.
 

This is to be expected (the lower percentage) when GB reviews are on a five star system. Which is the only annoying thing about Metacritic. Five stars? 100%!!111

Now on page 8, foo'.

I'd say the GB score system doesn't really line up well with the positive/negative/neutral system that Metacritic has them reported as.

Average games on Giantbomb get a 3 out of 5 (60%) while they get 7/10 (70%) on most other sites, so this makes sense.

For some reason, don't ask me why, I get bothered when I see a big 100 next to Giant Bomb on a Metacritic page when a game is given five stars. I just don't feel that the five star model should translate to the scoring system used by Metacritic. Basically I feel that Giant Bomb should not be on Metacritic.

Christ, the redesign of Metacritic is awful.

I hate the 5 star review system.  

So if that data's true, then every other reviewer, on average, thinks every game is perfect? Remembering GameSpot, it seems plausible.

Interesting data. I guess my only worry is publishers, who may make some insidious decisions based off of it. Let's hope that's not the case.