The gaming industry places too much emphasis upon Metacritic ratings. We’ve known this since it was revealed that bonuses were withheld from Obsidian employees due to them falling one point short of their Metascore target of 85 for Fallout: New Vegas, and it continues to remain a large focal point of each new video game release, nullifying the actual written text of each review in favor of placing the importance solely upon the numerical value they assign to a game. Now Uncharted 4 has raised the ire of a gaggle of angry gamers, enraged that a negative review of the game has been allowed on the site, sullying its precious Metascore as it sticks out like a sore thumb in among a crowd of reviews gushing with praise.
We’re all guilty of having looked at the score a critic has given a game before reading the argument they have made in defense of that rating. However, Metacritic perpetuates this idea that the text itself isn’t important, and that nothing else matters outside of these cold, hard numbers. This isn’t true, of course: I’ve reviewed a large number of games in my time and have always felt that being constrained by these numbers is a useless way of judging anything. When I see outlets using decimals, I’m forever confused by their reasoning behind awarding a game a 7.8, or an 8.6; what justified that .8 or .6? Why not a .4, or a .9? I’m sure that if you asked each critic who’s ever used a decimal in their review, they wouldn’t be able to give you a reasonable justification for these additional numbers. They only exist because we’re fascinated by awarding things points, and the addition of a decimal allows these outlets to force more points into their already arbitrary scoring system.
No one needs to share your opinion of Uncharted 4
Metacritic is useful as a measuring stick, given that it collects reviews from a wide range of outlets around the web. But the onus is frequently placed upon the site to provide an exact indication of whether or not the consumer should buy a game, diluting a development studio’s years of work into a couple of numbers spat out by an imperfect aggregation system. But it isn’t publishers who are continuing to make Metacritic such a big deal – it’s gamers.
Uncharted 4’s current Metascore. We’re sure it’ll survive.
This has been most transparently evidenced in the vitriolic reaction to a review from The Washington Post, which was largely critical of Uncharted 4 and, as it stands, is the only review of the game that isn’t a positive one. Though reviewer Michael Thomsen didn’t give the game score, with Metacritic erroneously stating that he’d awarded it a 40/100, he was very critical of the game and, when you consider that the second-lowest rating the game received was an 80/100, it does stand out. The more reasonably minded individuals reading this review would, if they enjoyed playing Uncharted 4, carry on with their lives after coming to the conclusion that they disagreed with the author. They would not, I imagine, take to Change.org – the home for bleating obsessives shouting into the ether – in order to start up a petition to get Metacritic to remove the review from the site.
Metascore obsession harms the industry
But that’s exactly what Dimitris Xorikos, a man with a fundamental lack of knowledge in regards to how opinions work, has set about to do, and he has somehow managed to achieve nearly 5,000 signatures in the process. In a petition titled Remove the Washington Post review from Uncharted 4‘s metascore,” Dimitris writes: I’m sorry but when having too much detail became a bad thing, this reviewer is out of his mind. I believe U4 is one of the greatest games ever created and it is my personal favorite for sure , although i can justify some reviewers giving it a 9 or an 8. But this is an utter disgrace [sic].”
Also See: Uncharted 4 Multiplayer Guide: How to Level Up Your Weapons Quickly and More
He continues: “Your Washington post for Christ’s Sake , not a 12-year-old’s diary. Treat the game with professionalism and respect.” In his diatribe Dimitris has clearly confused “professionalism and respect” with “undiluted, sycophantic praise,” but he’s not alone in his way of thinking. Even voice actor Troy Baker, who assumes the role of Sam Drake in the game, tweeted out his support for the petition, though later retracted his original comments by stating that he was being “over-protective of the project” and that the game doesn’t need him “battling windmills in their honor.”
Nathan Drake, desperately trying to escape the comments section of the Washington Post review.
It’s not something that should need to be said, yet here we are: gamers should not be emotionally invested in a game’s Metascore. Taking it upon oneself to not simply enjoy a video game, but to also embark upon a campaign to ensure that everyone else falls in line with your own opinion and state that they enjoy it, too, is not only a display of incredible arrogance, but is also remarkably strange. Regardless of whether or not you disapprove of the Washington Post’s review, there is no substantive reason for your investment in it to continue after your eyes glance across its final sentence. Placing such importance upon Metascores ultimately harms the industry, too, as it validates some publishers’ belief that the site should logically be used as a metric of success, which in turn stands to make developers warier of taking risks in case some critics disapprove of them, thus denting their average rating.
Gamers have the easiest part in the entire game-making process, with them only having to sit there and enjoy what has been created for them, yet so many insist on making their own lives more difficult by holding candles to certain developers/publishers/manufacturers and defending them with every fiber of their being. These are multi-million dollar organizations – they don’t need the help of the Dimitris of the world, filing poorly-written petitions in order to force the world to agree with them. Play your games, love them, hate them, but for the love of God don’t you go anywhere near Change.org.
