Before I have to step out to visit the local burns unit, I would like to clarify that I would score all of the sole pixel games 0/10. The function of a game as a product is to bring entertainment to the consumer. There are of course a number of different ways they can achieve this - compelling gameplay, a gripping narrative, luscious graphics and so on. A game that provides its consumer with no entertainment should be scored a zero as it is not fit for purpose. Something that is not fit for purpose should not be scored as 5/10 just because the other products on the market are equally awful. The developers will see that as acceptable and continue to produce products of this quality.

In a more relevant scenario to this thread, if someone is to play 10 games this year and they all provided a large amount of entertainment then they have all met their purpose as a product and logically should receive high scores. Scoring a game poorly to fit strict statistical criteria when it has provided exactly what you wanted from it is nonsensical. It's fine to give every game you play a high score if they provided you with that much enjoyment. Indeed, well done - you are a savvy consumer who presumably makes purchases either relevant to your interests or based on critical reception. I assume that's most of us here.

For the record, I agree with Pumpkin that 5/10 is not a bad score and that "only 7/10 upwards is worth playing" is silly.