Tag: metacritic

9GN: How IGN Went Overboard With Game Reviews

9GN

IGN gave 84 games a 9 or higher in 2012, which is considered “Amazing” on their scale.

I shouldn’t have to say anymore than that to render you speechless, but let’s look at the full description for a 9 on the IGN rubric:

“One of the best games out there. When this generation of games ends, people will look back and say, “This was one of the best games made for the system.” It might have a few flaws, but this is a must-buy.”

Again, that should be all I need to say. IGN says there were 84 of those in 2012. Seems incredible, right? 2012 was a surprisingly good year for games, but 84? How many games did you play last year? 12? Maybe 15 on the high-end? And yet IGN is telling us that when this generation of games ends, we will look back at 84 different games in 2012 (this isn’t including each version of a multiplatform title) and say it was one of the best games made for its respective system? That’s insane and it is becoming an issue. What is the average gamer supposed to do with that? Continue reading 9GN: How IGN Went Overboard With Game Reviews

Diablo 3’s Launch and Metacritic’s Irrelevance

Diablo 3 review scores

Diablo III will probably go down as having one of the most successful launches of the year sales wise. Even if Blizzard’s server farm probably melted during the initial 24-hour rush, there’s no denying that a lot of people wanted to play the new hack-and-slash RPG. What’s curious about this is that Diablo III hit the streets with no launch day reviews.

While it can be argued that Blizzard, along with Valve, could get away with not needing day-one reviews, the case can still be made that the rush to review is damaging to both the industry and the consumer. It’s something we’ve talked about before here on GamerSushi, but VG247’s Patrick Garrat takes another look at this concept from the perspective of Diablo’s launch.

As games are becoming increasingly reliant on an Internet connection, pre-release review events are done in a controlled environment so things like latency, server issues and all sorts of errors don’t crop up. Games like this are reviewed in a vacuum and that harms the consumer’s impression. Launch-day reviews can be damaging in this case. Remember Gears of War 2, and all of its great scores, none of which mentioned the horrible net-code that plagued users for weeks? Remember any of the Battlefield games that launched with no connectivity, effectively killing the only reason people bought the game? This is stuff that doesn’t get addressed in a pre-release review session.

The big presence behind all of this is Metacritic, where a studio’s future is made or broken. There’s been a couple cases for breaking away from using Metacritic as a measure of success, but Diablo III is the first step towards actual change. If Blizzard was willing to distance themselves from this model, maybe other publishers will follow suit.

So what do you guys think? Does Diablo III’s successful launch mean that we can eventually move away from Metacritic or is this a case of Blizzard being Blizzard? Do you think that day-one reviews are a detriment to a game’s success? What do you think about the article in general? Go!

Source – VG247

Metacritic Founder to Game Reviewers: Use the Full Scale

1.0

One of the things that we try to do differently around here than at other game sites is handle our reviews with care. We do our best not to rush them, we try to tackle them thoughtfully, and really consider our scale when we assign grades. This hasn’t always worked out perfectly, and sometimes I still question the way we handle this, but I think we do a decent job. Other game reviewers? No comment.

Metacritic founder Marc Doyle, however, has some choice comments of his own. Talking with GamePro, Doyle expressed his opinion that game reviewers, quite frankly, need to play more crap. He believes that the sliding scale of game reviews to higher ranges is in part due to reviewers not playing truly bad games often enough.

Below-average games are not being reviewed as often as they once were and, partly as a result, critics have not honed their skills at assigning scores from the lower end of their grading scales. The question of exactly how bad a game has to be to merit a 1 score instead of 2 on the 10 point scale, for example, is not being contemplated with as much experience, care and precision as the 8 versus 9 consideration.

Later he goes on to talk about how the film industry is used to these bad scores, and knows how to adapt itself to them. He believes that playing bad games would help reviewers at their trade more, and would benefit the industry as a result.

So what do you guys think about this? In my mind, this could easily be a chicken vs egg argument. Have reviewers done this because of Metacritic, or did Metacritic come about because of this trend in reviews? Or is it the publishers who have put too much pressure on reviewers? Who exactly is to blame for this strange relationship? Go!

Source – GamePro

GamerSushi Asks: Can You Attach a Number to Art?

Homefront

Ouch. Someone might be sore from a few reviews.

While this post is not going to be another in the inexorably long discussion of whether or not games are art, it does apply to the discussion about how we view art in general. You see, THQ EVP Danny Bilson recently shared some thoughts with IGN about Homefront’s review scores. When asked what he thought of them, Bilson had this to say:

If we were universally panned, I would say “Yeah I guess it didn’t work.” I think the idea of 50 reviews that are so radically spread says that we made a game that has a point of view and that you might even argue is controversial…

Do I prefer that it’s controversial? No, I’d prefer if everybody in the world loved it. But there are 20+ reviews that are over 80, there are some haters, and there are some mid-range ones. Do I read them all to see what we can do better next time and have every review be 100? Of course, our goal is always that. What I will say pretty clearly is the game is not a “71.” You can’t apply math to art.

I haven’t played Homefront, so I’m not going to comment on whether or not Homefront is in fact art, or not. However, this does bring an issue up about how video games are reviewed and scored. Do you guys think that in an artistic medium, it’s alright to attach hard numbers to these games? I mean, Shadow of the Colossus has a 91 attached to it on Metacritic, which to me just seems silly for something that I actually do consider art.

So what do you guys think? Go!

Source – IGN

The GamerSushi Show, Ep 9: Reach-Cast and Fall Gaming

Halo: ReachThe GamerSushi podcast is back with your regularly scheduled programming, and this time the main portion is a helping of Halo: Reach with a side of fall gaming. In this episode, we take a look at the big Bungie title and then do a rundown of all of the other titles we’re anxious to play in the coming months, plus we predict scores for some of the bigger names in a new, awesome segment. Throw in some community topics and the Nintendo 3DS, and you’ve got yourself a mighty podcast.

If I’m being honest, I think this is probably our best episode yet. We didn’t run into any technical difficulties, and I think we’ve finally nailed down a format for discussion that keeps things moving from topic to topic easily. But then again, I should just let you be the judge, since I’m biased.

As always, please go rate this cast on iTunes and subscribe with the handy links to the right. Enjoy!

Continue reading The GamerSushi Show, Ep 9: Reach-Cast and Fall Gaming

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Android | RSS