Firstly, I can't tell if you are confused about what metacritic is, but it doesn't do it's own reviews and the few sentences it lists are excerpts/summaries from longer reviews from sites like IGN. If a review was only a few sentences long it wouldn't be very informative anyway.  no, i rather take the few sentences review from site like metacritic.com, than sites like ign with their one page detailed review, which are obviously paid-off by sponsors/ certain gaming publishers.
And as stupid as IGN reviews can seem, that doesn't mean they are paid off. The reviewers there are just susceptible to their own hype as well as their own egos for getting lots of early exclusive reviews.
And claiming that MoH Warfighter deserves a better review than a Call of Duty game just tells me that I'm glad you aren't reviewing games. Even if you aren't into the COD series, it isn't hard to see that those games are pretty good at nailing that formula whereas MoH Warfighter is a shitty wannabe. So blindly hating COD for it's popularity doesn't make MoH Warfighter the better game and it doesn't mean COD doesn't do anything new while remaining within the structure that got it where it is. Not saying you should eat up IGN's hype-filled reviews, but you also shouldn't act as if their reviews are completely off the mark about any praise for a COD game.