MasterCornholio
Member
Well it's better than a publisher that believes all their games will review well.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Ex-God of War developer reveals Sony "demands" 90+ Metascore from first party games
- Thread starter LakeOf9
- Start date
GenericUser
Member
I more or less expected this at this point tbh. There must be a reason why many first party sony games feel like games made for journalists. Heavily story driven third person cinenematic action adventures with rpg elements. It works though and the gamers also seem to be happy about it. So why change a winning formula.
Fabieter
Member
With the ammount of issues it had on launch its not too bad.
Days gone got rated in the 60 mostly for a bad launch tho.
Rykan
Member
I'm a bit surprised at the reactions here. There's so many people going like “Oh this is good”. “This is great. We need high quality games!”
I get where that is coming from, but I really think a lot of you are missing the implications this has: It stifles innovation and risk taking. Creating something new, innovative and boundary breaking is hard. Creating a game that is new and innovative, while also simultaneously hit it out of the park with a 90+ score on Metacritic on the first try? That is insanely hard.
So why take that risk? We all know how Game critics operate. If you have a successful game & formula (Like GoW), then there's no need to innovate or iterate. Just release “more of the same” with some minor additions, and critics will give it the exact same scores as the previous ones. We see that happen with every franchise.
I get where that is coming from, but I really think a lot of you are missing the implications this has: It stifles innovation and risk taking. Creating something new, innovative and boundary breaking is hard. Creating a game that is new and innovative, while also simultaneously hit it out of the park with a 90+ score on Metacritic on the first try? That is insanely hard.
So why take that risk? We all know how Game critics operate. If you have a successful game & formula (Like GoW), then there's no need to innovate or iterate. Just release “more of the same” with some minor additions, and critics will give it the exact same scores as the previous ones. We see that happen with every franchise.
HerjansEagleFeeder
Member
Would be naive to think this only affects the way they manage their studios. You have to make sure the people giving scores are on your side, too.
FeralEcho
Member
No wonder Naughty Dog is giving up on fucking Factions after such long development.They were trying to do both which is fucking Impossible.It just took them 3-4 years to find out lol
ChorizoPicozo
Member
as you should. Metacritic matters despite what some people think, is a very important metric for publishers.
Go_Ly_Dow
Member
God of War Ragnarock was 
in reflection.
Again failed to deliver memorable boss fights or an epic finale. I know many were disappointed with the closing segments of the game. The writing and dialogue was atrocious. Post release discussion or praise disappeared quickly.
Last time I checked the MC score was 94, which is very Inflated all things considered. Mega bore fest.
in reflection.Again failed to deliver memorable boss fights or an epic finale. I know many were disappointed with the closing segments of the game. The writing and dialogue was atrocious. Post release discussion or praise disappeared quickly.
Last time I checked the MC score was 94, which is very Inflated all things considered. Mega bore fest.
Last edited:
ChorizoPicozo
Member
Dr. Claus
Banned
God of War Ragnarock was a bit
Again failed to deliver memorable boss fights or an epic finale. I know many were disappointed with the closing segments of the game. The writing and dialogue was atrocious. Post release discussion or praise disappeared quickly.
Inflated MC score imo.
MC Scores are meaningless. The only folks that tend to bring it up are console warriors and children who need validation for their purchase decisions.
And yea, GW Ragnarok was shit. You could clearly tell they switched directors and failed to understand what made 2018 so great.
DeltaPolarBear
Member
You think Nintendo bribe reviewers? Totk didn't get wide acclaim by bribing. It sounds like you are just trying to justify why games you like didn't get high scores.
Look, we all have personal tastes. No one said you need to like every 90+ game. In fact most 90+ games don't interest me personally because of my own tastes. But you don't see me accusing reviewers of being bought off.
Last edited:
![L*][*N*K](/data/avatars/m/842/842515.jpg?1696510303){kind=avatar}
L*][*N*K
Banned
I don't think that is the case here.
systemr123
Banned
You can see what happens when you don’t demand quality on the green side of the lake. It’s only good to demand from your own studios, that they create games that are great quality games/experiences.
When has it ever been a bad thing to demand quality work from your employees? Jeez, this new generation of kids are really soft little sponges and just think the world that older people build for them came into being without hard labor and sacrifice. The entitlement of the youth is off the charts nowadays.
When has it ever been a bad thing to demand quality work from your employees? Jeez, this new generation of kids are really soft little sponges and just think the world that older people build for them came into being without hard labor and sacrifice. The entitlement of the youth is off the charts nowadays.
StueyDuck
Member
I mean it's called good business... you want the absolute best product you can offer.
It is an old school way of thinking but it pays off. Nowadays it's all about as quick as cheap and as fast as possible.
Compare Thor love and thunder to the OG iron man. Cheap and nasty vs the best product they can make... I want the latter
It is an old school way of thinking but it pays off. Nowadays it's all about as quick as cheap and as fast as possible.
Compare Thor love and thunder to the OG iron man. Cheap and nasty vs the best product they can make... I want the latter
Alx
Member
Yeah, it's a strategy that makes sense business-wise but is terrible when you apply it to something with an artistic component (and even for business, some would say that sometimes being disruptive is better than giving people what they asked for). Reviews are a metric that can help you evaluate the quality of your creation, but they shouldn't be your goal (if only because any metric is flawed and restricted).
Hawking Radiation
Member
Negotiator101
Member
But not Insomniac? Sounds like rubbish to me.
Pedro Motta
Gold Member
You never played any of them right? Right.
ToTTenTranz
Banned
Yes, they built a brand of universally recognized quality. When you buy a game from Playstation Studios to play on a Playstation console we know there's a level of maturity and attention to detail that is only found on Nintendo's 1st party games to play on Nintendo consoles. It helps at selling consoles and bringing people to their software ecossystem.
Sony cancels lots of 1st and 2nd party projects when they see they're not up to that level, or at least they'll reboot those like Aspyr's KOTOR.
Developers wanting a shot at releasing mediocre and disappointing games can go elsewhere. There are plenty of other publishers for that.
Sony cancels lots of 1st and 2nd party projects when they see they're not up to that level, or at least they'll reboot those like Aspyr's KOTOR.
Developers wanting a shot at releasing mediocre and disappointing games can go elsewhere. There are plenty of other publishers for that.
Last edited:
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
ozz ex machina
Member
They aren't fickle though are they?
Is it third person?
Does it have good animations and lots of cutscenes?
Is it in the 10-20 hour mark?
Does it have limited gameplay mechanics and focus more on an okay narrative?
10/10
Hypereides
Member
It gets even more frightening once you consider that a significant amount of gamers (circa 85+%) almost blindly accept review scores as is. You can sit and argue with one of them that a game might be worth a play, but they'll refuse to budge because some game's average could be within the 70s bracket.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Good!
bbeach123
Member
Good .
ofc there are still game that had low score but still good and well received or game that had high score but low sale . But what the chance ? 1 in 10 , 1 in 100 ?
I bet they rather dont take that chance . And I'm 100% certainly sure that game that had problem at launch (bug/performance/etc) dont have high meta score .
ofc there are still game that had low score but still good and well received or game that had high score but low sale . But what the chance ? 1 in 10 , 1 in 100 ?
I bet they rather dont take that chance . And I'm 100% certainly sure that game that had problem at launch (bug/performance/etc) dont have high meta score .
Last edited:
DeltaPolarBear
Member
I am sure if this is so easy then Xbox would be able to crank them out every month then?
Utherellus
Member
People saying they see no problem in this Metacritic score obsession are delusional.
Remember Days Gone? Driveclub? TLOU2 scandal?
They don't inherently chase quality. They chase prestige of a brand.
Remember Days Gone? Driveclub? TLOU2 scandal?
They don't inherently chase quality. They chase prestige of a brand.
In Cold Blood
Banned
I mean, is it a bad goal to have? I would say it's a good goal.
The only time it's an issue is if they cancel great games and potential IPs like Days Gone because it didn't hit the spot with critics.
I think this gen there has been a number of times where games have been average of critics meta, but are actually great and enjoyed by heaps of people.
Dead Island 2, High On Life and Sea Of Thieves as just a few.
The only time it's an issue is if they cancel great games and potential IPs like Days Gone because it didn't hit the spot with critics.
I think this gen there has been a number of times where games have been average of critics meta, but are actually great and enjoyed by heaps of people.
Dead Island 2, High On Life and Sea Of Thieves as just a few.
ozz ex machina
Member
Xbox quite clearly have a different strategy? Or they can't do it? Where did I say it was easy to do?
It's not cheap or easy making these cookie cutter 10/10 games. But let's not pretend there isn't a very clear forumla to success for good ratings in the AAA market. The journos are not "fickle".
Maybe try reading what I'm saying and not forcing a narrative I wasn't driving at all. Christ so many console warring babies in this place.
The amount of people jumping immediately to "You can't demand quality without stiffing innovashuns!" is wild, especially as the source of this quote (that has had a ludicrous amount of personal bias used in its paraphrasing) isn't even close to saying that. But one person makes one quote that can be misconstrued as publisher overreach and it's "Oh I knew it!" For example:
Just say you think SONY is bribing all these publications (and yes it has to be all or what is the point). Yes, it is a stupid belief but at least you can show folks that you're committed to the nuttery.
Now do the other studios that aren't NAUGHTY DOG. I mean seriously, when was the last time you played a 10 hour SONY game? Some of you are just blowing smoke out of your arses to try and clearly console war.
Just say you think SONY is bribing all these publications (and yes it has to be all or what is the point). Yes, it is a stupid belief but at least you can show folks that you're committed to the nuttery.
Now do the other studios that aren't NAUGHTY DOG. I mean seriously, when was the last time you played a 10 hour SONY game? Some of you are just blowing smoke out of your arses to try and clearly console war.
DeltaPolarBear
Member
To even say there is a formula is saying it is easy.
And it isn't about it being expensive; plenty of games cost millions and failed.
You can't say there is a clear formula, and then in the same breath say it is hard to do. It doesn't even make sense.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
They should all strive for high levels of quality. Good on Sony.
ozz ex machina
Member
The formula is around the game design and mechanics.
The challenge is making it very polished, spending a tonne of money to get it looking good and running good, realistic animations etc.
M1chl
Currently Gif and Meme Champion
The problem which I am seeing with this, that it is score 90, which is given to by those "game journalists", thus that does not mean it is generally that score for your average Neogaf player.
Outside of that, I would say it is good, its first party, they directly put the money down, so I don't see problem, outside of that above.
Outside of that, I would say it is good, its first party, they directly put the money down, so I don't see problem, outside of that above.
ozz ex machina
Member
Sorry adding in an "open world" doesn't make a difference. Horizon, ghosts, spiderman, god of war. Let's not all pretend these aren't following a specific formula here to get good reviews which results in these games all feeling "samey".
custardbun01
Member
Good way to stifle creativity, play it safe and discourage risks and new IPs. Sony are going backwards IMO.