Ex-God of War developer reveals Sony "demands" 90+ Metascore from first party games

LakeOf9

Member
Sony is very confident in the success of its studios and the Brazilian Rafael Grassetti, former Santa Monica art director on God of War, talked about this in a participation in the Flow Games Podcast. According to him, the company demands "at least" a 90 score on Metacritic from its major studios like Santa Monica and Naughty Dog.

Within the company, there is a whole division that specifically takes care of this topic. Games need to go through deeper analysis to achieve higher scores, as he explained. Grassetti confirmed that these reviews are important to the studios, that he is against random reviewers being allowed on Metacritic and denied the existence of an "extra" payment based on score performances. In fact, bonuses are geared toward sales figures.

SOURCE

I hate Metacritic culture, I wish Sony wasn't obsessed with it
 
Meaning GIF
 
shiiiiiiit better that then sales.

Maybe we need more publishers demanding quality first and foremost.
 
as they should. If more developers cared about reviews and sales instead of money and MTX gaming would be in a better place
How about just care about making a good game and dont chase an arbitrary review score, that kills innovation and creativity and results in safe design by committee style games?

I love sony output, but their games are already starting to feel samey between Horizon/God of War/Spider-Man (thankfully stuff like Returnal and TLOU is still distinct)
 
How about just care about making a good game and dont chase an arbitrary review score, that kills innovation and creativity and results in safe design by committee style games?

I love sony output, but their games are already starting to feel samey between Horizon/God of War/Spider-Man (thankfully stuff like Returnal and TLOU is still distinct)
creative games get good scores too.
>Demand Game of The Year quality

>Want all of your new Games to be cash-milking GaaS

Pick One.
hey, Bungie's able to do both
 
Last edited:
Sure, they have to aim high tho. Whether it is successful or not, that's different story.

If you are only aim at 70s - low 80s, then you'll end up with mediocres. My two cents.
 
Making a good game leads to that score.....soooooo yea
Really? Prey is one of the best games ever made and has a sub-80 (maybe a sub-70?)

Dark Souls 2 is the worst Dark Souls game, and the highest rated one

Are you sure reviewers are the sole arbiter of "quality"?
 
Its your top tier studios, I would sure fucking hope so. For example, as if the zelda team and nintendo didnt have aspirations to top metacritic scores again. Its why they delayed totk for a year even though its feature complete.
 
I'm not entirely sure this should be viewed as a negative thing. This translates to higher budgets, more people reviewing the work in an iterative form, more play testing etc etc etc.

What does he mean by "demand?" Usually that comes with stakes like less pay or something, but he said their bonuses are based on sales figures instead of the review scores.

I dunno, I'm sure I'll get dumped on for saying that but I'm not entirely convinced this is anything other than "having high standards" unless later on in the podcast he implies they endured some type of abuse to achieve the scores.
 
That's dumb especially since me my buds can form a podcast and get Metacritic credentials, Sony's going down the wrong path with that just make a great game and let the chips fall where they may, by having devs think about mechanics that can help them score a 90+ just doesn't feel authentic
 
I don't see any problem... Or do I?
Imagine having to make games appealing to games journalists? Yeah, that's a problem right there.
Yep, that's the problem. The bias some of these outlets have, and not talking just platforms, makes this a risky proposition.
 
The thread title is honestly misleading, I know people like to group SIE as just Santa Monica/Naughty Dog, but it's just not like that.
 
obsession over reviews works

Look at Fallout New Vegas, even if the game's Metascore didn't hit Bethesda's target it's still one of the most revered and beloved RPGs of all time.
 
That's dumb especially since me my buds can form a podcast and get Metacritic credentials, Sony's going down the wrong path with that just make a great game and let the chips fall where they may, by having devs think about mechanics that can help them score a 90+ just doesn't feel authentic
Thank you, this is all im saying but some people refuse to listen

obsession over reviews works

Look at Fallout New Vegas, even if the game's Metascore didn't hit Bethesda's target it's still one of the most revered and beloved RPGs of all time.
And it's an 84.

Literally, your example disproves your entire point
 
Last edited:
How about just care about making a good game and dont chase an arbitrary review score, that kills innovation and creativity and results in safe design by committee style games?

Yeah. . .you are taking this too literally. Nothing about what is in that Reddit thread suggests SONY has a checklist to LITERALLY ensure games meet some arbitrary threshold. How in the hell could they possibly? You are taking a comment that is more meant to convey that SONY has a good nose for what will be critically (if not commercially successful) as some evidence of publisher overreach (instead of just knowing your audience).

. . .probably one of the weirdest fronts in this forever war I've seen.
 
And it's an 84.

Literally, your example disproves your entire point
cept that not really since again Bethesda were asking for high scores. despite the one point off the game's more beloved now than ever before. And look at what that 84 generated, tons of mods and a revered status among the gaming community... It's no wonder Sony's games are popular when they strive for 90s only
 
Last edited:
There is no problem with that? I wish more developer/publishers felt the same way

there absolutely is a problem with that.
look what this pre release analysis did to God of Handholding and Horizon Schizophrenic West.

Yeah. . .you are taking this too literally. Nothing about what is in that Reddit thread suggests SONY has a checklist to LITERALLY ensure games meet some arbitrary threshold. How in the hell could they possibly? You are taking a comment that is more meant to convey that SONY has a good nose for what will be critically (if not commercially successful) as some evidence of publisher overreach (instead of just knowing your audience).

like Pop music producers... they "have a nose" for what will be a critical and commercial success, hence why most mainstream pop sounds like it was written by an algorithm.
 
Really? Prey is one of the best games ever made and has a sub-80 (maybe a sub-70?)

Dark Souls 2 is the worst Dark Souls game, and the highest rated one

Are you sure reviewers are the sole arbiter of "quality"?

That's simply a matter of your opinion and review scores not lining up. That happens all the time.

Thank you, this is all im saying but some people refuse to listen


And it's an 84.

Literally, your example disproves your entire point

How is 84 not a great review score?
 
Metacritic is an average score. The only way to get a great average score is if nearly everyone gives you a great score. The problem is, everyone includes a lot of people. When you're trying for greatness, everyone doesn't get it. Certainly not the first time they see it. The scores reflect that.

I've sometimes thought the standard deviation on scores is a better metric than the average score itself.

avin
 
It doesn't sound bad that they demand quality, but it's weird that it's tied to Metacritic.
Also, I don't know if it's related to this, but my current problem with Sony's big titles is that they're becoming very homogeneous. I miss the gems they used to produce back in the PS2 and PS3 days, i.e. when Japan Studio was still around.
 
It doesn't sound bad that they demand quality, but it's weird that it's tied to Metacritic.
Also, I don't know if it's related to this, but my current problem with Sony's big titles is that they're becoming very homogeneous. I miss the gems they used to produce back in the PS2 and PS3 days, i.e. when Japan Studio was still around.
Japan Studio was still around in the PS4 era. IMO, they weren't that special in the PS3 gen aside from stuff like Boku no Natsuyasumi 3 or Demon's Souls, really. I found Sony as a whole to be a bit boring in that entire period.
 
With the amount of money they are spending (9 figures) they should, and other publishers should be doing it too. These companies are just not getting their money's worth these days and doing gamers a disservice.
 
I better not see any criticism here about this good policy. Review/metacritic threads stack up posts faster than any other on this website.
 
SOURCE

I hate Metacritic culture, I wish Sony wasn't obsessed with it
Errr excuse me?

i can't think of anything I would want more than Sony insisting their studios put out the best games they can possibly make.

It's like you forget that for a game to score90+ on Metacritic, it has to be really good. I wud think that every publisher had similar expectations from their teams.
 
Well, everyone here shits on gaming journalists and sites like IGN and Polygon so to see everyone saying that Sony is right making their games to what those people will see as a good game is interesting.
 
Top Bottom