Why Metacritic doesn't matter : DICE 2009 developers say NO

[Skeeuk]

Why Metacritic doesn't matter

Monday 23-Feb-2009 6:04 PM Do review scores affect sales?

www.cvg.co.uk

There is a prevailing theory that review scores affect sales. It is certainly true that there is a high correlation between aggregate review ratings, like those found on Metacritic.com, and sales; games rated over 90 percent tend to record higher game sales than their lower scoring peers. The question that was posed to the developer panel at DICE Summit 2009 was whether they designed games with reviewers in mind. The answer was an overwhelming no.

"The first person you have to design for is yourself," says Danny Bilson, creative director at THQ. He acknowledges that Metacritic is a powerful force. He's found that he can game Metacritic by improving what he calls "linear assets" that don't affect the actual code, which the team spends most of their time writing. By that he means offering up a better story, better voice acting, and better music. Reviewers have to write, says Bilson, so give them something to write about. By paying attention to such things, you can gain a five to ten point bump because in Bilson's eyes game reviewers care more about story than consumers.

The consensus among panelists was review scores in and of themselves don't matter. Fingers pointed to the success of games like Wii Fit that scored in the 60 percent range. Reviews of such games just aren't relevant to their audience, says Rich Hilleman, chief creative director at Electronic Arts. Social gamers are not the people who are going to be reading hardcore game magazines.

No, the issue isn't the impact of the score on sales, it is how your company uses them, says THQ's Bilson. They are either a touchstone or they are a weapon. Companies use Metacritic scores to project game sales. When teams pitch a game, they're asked to estimate the score. Why would a development team ever shoot for anything less than 100 percent, he asks. The problem is that these projected scores determine game budgets and marketing spends.

Metacritic scores are trailing indicators. Chris Taylor, chief executive of Gas Powered Games, doesn't need a Metacritic score. He knows if he put out a "shitty game." Developers get that information from retail, he says. If it sells well it was good, if it didn't it was bad.

The worst part about these reviews, says Mona Hamilton, SVP of marketing at Capcom, is they are suggestive--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event.

Another problem with Metacritic scores, says Bilson, is they aren't weighted. Reviews from Time Magazine are treated the same as some kid's blog. A low score from a "couple weird sites" can significantly drag down average review scores. [Metacritic's website actually notes that scores are weighted. Thanks to readers for pointing this out.]

Hilleman suggests that game developers don't need Metacritic at all. With telemetric data, they can see what is wrong with all of their products--the answers are in the data. Community, he says, is the most important thing.

--------------------------------------------

i also say no.

ive posted many times before if game:A gets a score of 90 based off 55 reviews, and game:B scores 87 based off 80 reviews. it isnt hardly fair at all.

plus many reviews are added from blogs and many times from outlets who dont even review games as such.

do you think metacritic matters to you as a gamer.