Metacritic

Metacritic

Web address	Metacritic.com
Commercial?	Yes
Type of site	Review aggregator
Registration	Free/subscription
Owner	CBS Interactive (CBS Corporation)
Launched	January 1999 (1999-01)
Alexa rank	1,505 (May 2015)[1]
Current status	Online

Metacritic is a website that aggregates reviews of music albums, games, movies, TV shows, DVDs, and formerly, books. For each product, a numerical score from each review is obtained and the total is averaged. It was created and founded by Jason Dietz, Marc Doyle, and Julie Doyle Roberts. An excerpt of each review is provided along with a hyperlink to the source. Three color codes of Green, Yellow and Red summarize the critic's recommendation, giving an idea of the general appeal of the product among reviewers and, to a lesser extent, the public. It is regarded as the video game industry's foremost review aggregator.^[2][3]

Metacritic's method of scoring converts each review into a percentage that the site decides for itself, before taking a weighted average based on the critic's fame or stature, and listing different numbers of reviews. Many review websites give a review grade out of five, out of ten, out of a hundred, or even an alphabetical score. Metacritic converts such a grade into a percentage. For reviews with no explicit scores (for example, The New York Times reviews), Metacritic manually assesses the tone of the review before assigning a relevant grade.

History

Metacritic was launched in January 1999 by Marc Doyle, along with his sister Julie Doyle Roberts and a classmate from the University of Southern California law school, Jason Dietz. Rotten Tomatoes was already compiling movie reviews at the time, but Doyle, Roberts, and Dietz "saw an opportunity to cover a broader range of media". They sold Metacritic to CNET in 2005.^[4] CNET and Metacritic are owned by the CBS Corporation.^[5]

Nick Wingfield of The Wall Street Journal wrote in September 2004, "Mr. Doyle, 36, is now a senior product manager at CNET but he also acts as games editor of Metacritic".^[4] Speaking of video games, Doyle said, "A site like ours helps people cut through...unobjective promotional language". He also said "By giving consumers, and web users specifically, early information on the objective quality of a game, not only are they more educated about their choices, but it forces publishers to demand more from their developers, license owners to demand more from their licensees, and eventually, hopefully, the games get better". Doyle said, "I don't want to overstate our role in this area, but we're highlighting the review process", which he thinks was not taken as seriously when unconnected magazines and websites were providing their reviews in isolation.^[6]

In August 2010, the Metacritic website's appearance was heavily revamped. The reaction to the new format from existing Metacritic users was overwhelmingly negative.^[7][8]

Metascores

Metacritic's scores ("Metascores") are weighted averages—certain publications are given more significance "based simply because of their stature".^[4]

Metacritic Games Editor Marc Doyle was interviewed by Keith Stuart of The Guardian to "get a look behind the metascoring process". Stuart wrote "the metascore phenomenon, namely Metacritic and GameRankings, have become an enormously important element of online games journalism over the past few years".^[6] Doyle said that because video games are a greater investment of time and money than other forms of entertainment, gamers are much more informed about reviews than film fans or music fans. They would like to know "whether that hotly anticipated title is going to deliver."^[6]

The ranging metascores for games, films, television programs and music are:^[9]

Video Games

While there are several other review aggregating sites on the internet, Metacritic is regarded as the foremost such service for the video game industry.^[10][11]

Nick Wingfield of The Wall Street Journal has written that Metacritic "influence[s] the sales of games and the stocks of video game publishers", citing as example "One company [which] requires game publishers to pay higher royalties if they receive low scores on such sites". Wingfield explains the influence of the website as coming from the higher cost to consumers of buying video games than for buying music or movie tickets.^[4] Many executives say that low scores "can hurt the long-term sales potential" of game franchises.^[4] Wingfield wrote that Wall Street is paying attention to Metacritic and Game Rankings because the sites typically post scores before any sales data are publicly available, citing the rapid rise and fall in value, respectively, of the relevant game companies following the release of BioShock and Spider-Man 3.^[4]

In an interview with The Guardian, Marc Doyle cited, "two major publishers" which "conducted comprehensive statistical surveys through which they've been able to draw a correlation between high metascores and stronger sales" in certain genres.^[6] Doyle further claimed that an increasing number of businesses and financial analysts use Metacritic as "an early indicator of a game's potential sales and, by extension, the publisher's stock price."^[6]

In 2004, Jason Hall of Warner Bros. began "including 'quality metrics' in the contracts the studio signed with partners interested in licensing Warner movies for games". If a product does not receive specific scores or better from aggregator sites like Metacritic, some deals require game publishers to pay higher royalties to Warner Bros.^[4]

In 2008, Microsoft began using Metacritic review averages to de-list underperforming Xbox Live Arcade games.^[12][13]

Game ranking

This is the top 10 games with best metascore in the site (up to December 2014) ^[14] with ties in score decided by user ranking.

• Grand Theft Auto V, Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3, and NFL 2K1 also have Metacritic scores of 97.

Best game per year

This a list of the games with best metascore per year (since 1995).^[15]

Best exclusive per platform

This list shows the best exclusive game of each platform on Metacritic.^[16]

• 1 The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D has a higher score, but it's not an exclusive (it's a 3DS remake of The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time).
• 2 Persona 4 Golden has a higher score, but it's not an exclusive (it's a PS Vita port of Persona 4).
• 3 The Last of Us Remastered has a higher score, but it's not an exclusive (it's a PS4 remaster of The Last of Us).

Criticism

Many video game reviewers take issue with the way Metacritic assigns scores. When a game reviewer gives a video game a rating of "A", Metacritic assigns it a value of 100. When a reviewer gives a game a rating of "F", Metacritic assigns it a value of 0—although some reviewers think a score of 50 is more appropriate.^[4] When a reviewer gives a game a rating of "B-", Metacritic assigns it a value of 67—and many publishers, developers, and websurfers believe that the score should be closer to 80, instead of using the same linear scale as other scoring conversions.^[6] A former editor at the review site Game Revolution, Joe Dodson, criticized Metacritic and similar sites, saying their conversion system was turning their reviews into scores that were too low.^[4] Doyle said "I feel that ANY scale simply needs to be converted directly with its lowest possible grade equating to 0, and the highest to 100."^[6]

Doyle said some publishers want him to include certain critics that Metacritic does not track and some want certain critics excluded, usually because they give a game a poor review. Another common complaint from US publishers is that British critics should not be reviewing games that are based on American sports like the NFL, NASCAR, or the NBA. Doyle said, "Conversely, many European publishers feel that American critics are not qualified or properly situated to review football, rally, F1, cricket and rugby games". Doyle said, "once I've decided to track a publication, I cannot pick and choose which reviews I list on Metacritic based on such individual judgments".^[6]

Publishers often try to persuade Doyle to exclude reviews they feel are unfair, but Doyle said that after a publication has been included in the system, he refuses to omit any reviews that receive complaints.^[4]

The Xentax Foundation analyzed the games related data at Metacritic and published their findings in a 30-page comprehensive paper on January 19, 2014.^[17] One of the conclusions of the author, Mike Zuurman, was "The data at Metacritic leaves much to be desired and seems to be heavily biased", while calling the validity and the accuracy of the data "low".

As a result of the perceived negative influence of Metacritic on the way the video game industry works, several game reviewing sites, including Kotaku^[18] and Eurogamer^[19] have dropped numerical reviews that would appear in Metacritic, instead favoring a text-based assessment of a game.

In recent years, Metacritic has been the subject of criticism due to how the website currently handles the banning of users and users' reviews - with no notices or proper appeals for the affected.^[20][21] Critics and developers alike have pointed out the website's lack of personnel management along with the automatic systems since video-games can be "bombed" with 0/10 ratings under just one night, severely damaging the reputation of a video-game title. Signal Studios president and creative director Douglas Robert Albright III has described the website as having "no standards".^[22]

Critic weights

Metacritic stated that it will not reveal the relative weight assigned to each reviewer.^[23] However, the weights are easy to calculate using linear algebra, providing insight into the site's subjective rating of different critics.

See also

• Internet Movie Database (IMDb)
• Rating site
• Review aggregator

References

External links

• Official website