Support NeoGAF

[SliceSabre]

I mean...if you make quality games why not brag a bit?

 

[Forkball]

Thank god we have more Brian Ashcraft articles to brighten our day.

Nintendo wants to show their investors that they are making quality products. If Toyota had a car that was ranked #1 on some list, they would probably bring it up. Some companies have monetary rewards for development teams tied to Metacritic (not sure if Nintendo is one of them). I remember in some Square Enix presentation, the goal for some game was to have an 88 or above Metacritic score. Personally, I think tieing salary bonuses and trying to get a specific score is a bit strange, but really Nintendo is just saying, "We make good games."

 

[VicViper]

In a time and age where Metacritic scores are a common part of publishing contracts, why would anyone be surprised at their (questionable) role in the industry?

 

[JDSN]

How is this bad? I thought Ashcraft was only allowed to talk about weird japanese things, isnt this a little out of his depth?

 

[Bluth54]

Expected considering how great most of their games score.

edit: But it's sad that the greatest Wii U game stands at 83 only...

Yeah I don't understand how Tropical Freeze only has an 83 on metacritic, it's easily one of the best platformers ever made.

 

[massoluk]

When a brand-new title is released, there are often misconceptions at the outset, so I would not take the Metacritic.com Metascores and User Scores as the absolute tell-all index, but I do want us to do our best to release such highly evaluated titles in succession

Quoting again because it is worth quoting

 

[Chris1]

Wasn't this posted before?


Anyways, I don't really like that they are using metacritic, but I can't argue against it either. They consistently make great games.

 

[BY2K]

Kotaku: We don't know how the industry works.

 

[TheSpaceBetween]

Well, they get great scores in general, of course they are gonna use that to their advantage in terms of marketing their products.

 

[Zalman]

Nintendo really likes Metacritic

Kotaku really hates Metacritic

 

[Brazil]

"Article" sounds written by someone who wished their favorite games were reviewed better.

 

[Opiate]

That was written by a professional journalist?

Obviously Nintendo is relying on this because their sales are a disaster. It's a common technique: when you're struggling, focus on what's going well. It doesn't make it a good thing, but it's not particular to Nintendo.

Goodness, that writing. It reads like a 12 year old's, without exaggeration.

 

[TheSpaceBetween]

Kotaku really hates Metacritic

Which is hilarious, because they rate their games on an all or nothing, 0-1 point scale.

 

[Doctor Decimate]

It's just shorthand for "we get great reviews" so.....what's the problem here?

 

[Zen_Arcade]

Cool, another thread trying to make fun of Nintendo for doing what everyone else in the industry does.

 

[TheSlySoul]

Honestly I can see them using it. The idea of Metacritic doesn't make me mad, but I wish they would go a Rotten Tomatoes route where 6/10 and higher is a + and anything lower is a - plus make harsher reviews like movies did.

Also, great to see Virtue's Last Reward get some more recognition. I am so sad we won't get a Zero Escape 3.

Edit: It is also funny how Nintendo factors user score to show the 9 games on other consoles. Don't they know AAA games on other consoles get bad user scores because they aren't Nintendo? It is probably closer to 15 if just critic scores.

 

[NumberThree]

Ashcraft. Dude. Stop.

 

[Einbroch]

I have no issue with any of this. It is funny, however, how they use the user score to purposely cut off many dozen of their competitors' games when everyone knows user scores are a complete joke, propped up and brought down by fanboys.

 

[Sylverstone14]

Hey, the games that are in that infographic are pretty damn good, and it's a bad thing to say just that?

I mean, I may not like Metacritic as much as the next guy, but to stake Nintendo for daring to use it as a barometer for their brilliant game output last year is pure bias.

This is "desperation"?

That writing. Is it Ashcraft?

Who else?

 

[Mihael Mello Keehl]

Heh the facebook post says, "How depressing" lol

 

[thefro]

Here's the actual translated quote from Iwata during the presentation:

On the positive side, we feel strongly that Nintendo games maintained a significant presence in the year-end sales season.
One notable thing is that big titles released during and after autumn both for Nintendo 3DS and for Wii U maintained healthy sales and produced significant results in the year-end. Another thing is that we have received high evaluations of the quality of these titles.

Foreign website Metacritic.com is well known for its Metascore system that shows the average score out of 100 from various game media and websites. In other words, the Metascore is an index that shows how professional reviewers evaluated these games. Metacritic.com also takes reviews from users and discloses the average figure as the User Score.
We must understand that even among game players, majority of consumers that visit Metacritic.com are considered avid game fans. However, if a game receives both a high Metascore and a high User Score, many consumers use this as a guide to judge the quality of the game.

Nintendo of America posted this picture on its official Facebook page at the end of last year.
It shows a list of packaged game titles that received a Metascore of 85 or more and a User Score of 8.5+ or more on Metacritic.com, which we can admit received high scores both from the professional reviewers and consumers.
For Nintendo’s current platforms, Nintendo 3DS and Wii U, 19 titles met these criteria. In contrast, the current platforms of other companies, PS4,Xbox One and PS Vita, totaled eight titles.
When a brand-new title is released, there are often misconceptions at the outset, so I would not take the Metacritic.com Metascores and User Scores as the absolute tell-all index, but I do want us to do our best to release such highly evaluated titles in succession.

In fact, software available on our platforms continues to be reviewed highly even after the turn of the year. The two software titles which were released simultaneously with the New Nintendo 3DS hardware in the U.S. and Europe, "The Legend of Zelda: Majora’s Mask 3D" and "Monster Hunter 4 Ultimate," received the very high Metascores of 90 and 86 and User Scores of 9.5 and 8.9, respectively. Compared to the Metascore of 79, which the prequel in the "Monster Hunter" series, "Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate," received, we can understand that this most recent iteration is very highly reviewed.

It sounds like Iwata's well aware of Metacritic's drawbacks, but it is nice to get good scores there and they did need something to brag about in this presentation.

 

[Black Pewter]

Why is Rayman Legends listed as a Wii U exclusive? Or am I confused about what this is supposed to show?

 

[Petrae]

Kotaku really hates Metacritic

BINGO. A site that swears off review scores finds Metacritic "sad" and "depressing"? Stop the presses.

 

[Oregano]

I have no issue with any of this. It is funny, however, how they use the user score to purposely cut off many dozen of their competitors' games when everyone knows user scores are a complete joke, propped up and brought down by fanboys.

Have you seen some of the sites that get on Metacritic?

 

[Nibel]

Compared to what Schreier, Totilo and Hamilton are doing the articles from Ashcraft feel like a relict from ancient times.

Using a snarky tone to comment on something so mundane is not only unprofessional but rather cringeworthy. But then again, I haven't read a single good article from him yet.

 

[Ushojax]

It's sad but Metacritic is a huge deal to publishers, not just Nintendo.

 

[cacildo]

Expected considering how great most of their games score.

edit: But it's sad that the greatest Wii U game stands at 83 only...

I had to read this edit quite a few times to understand what were you talking about

You tropical freeze people...

 

[Somnid]

Iwata is proud of the critical reception and thinks this helps strengthen the business. It looks better when you have a somewhat tangible and unbiased outlet to demonstrate, flawed as it is. Investors in particular don't give a shit that the Zora swimming in Majora's Mask was not a well-received change but the Bomber Notebook changes were good and Monster Hunter had slightly better tutorials but muddy textures. That's exactly missing the forest for the trees, he's giving a 10,000 meter view of Nintendo software.

 

[Yoshi]

So Iwata wants to tell investors that they are doing a great job with game development and are working on keeping and increasing the image they produce games to a high quality standard (i.e. he wants to tell investors they are doing a good job), how should he back up this claim instead? I'm not a fan of Metacritic, but he points out it's a flawed meas of quality so I think it's fine for him to use it in this context.

 

[Einbroch]

Have you seen some of the sites that get on Metacritic?

Yes. Metacritic isn't perfect, but user scores are way off base. Look at the latest DmC or any game that has a controversy surrounding it.

 

[Lusankya]

Wasn't this posted before?

Yep, it's from last year. Nintendo used this image right before christmas.

 

[Bar81]

What else are they going to do, brag about sales numbers?

 

[bathsalts]

This guy is paid actual money to write? someone post an archive so this drizzling shit doesn't get clicks.

 

[flatearthpandas]

Fucking Metacritic.

What Iwata should have done is read every Nintendo game review aloud and let the shareholders decide for themselves what the reviewers thought.

 

[Broken Joystick]

Fucking Metacritic.

What Iwata should have done is read every Nintendo game review aloud and let the shareholders decide for themselves what the reviewers thought.

Q: What is your response to IGN's latest comments about "too much water"?
Iwata: [Laughs]

 

[thebloo]

Most high rated Metacritic games also sell well, so why not like Metacritic as a publisher? It's an easy way to market your game, just like "it won 1000 GOTY awards" is.

I mean, game X is rated 93 on Metacritic and it's coming to a platform that you own. Aren't you at least going to take a look?

 

[Wulfram]

There isn't a better way of showing that your games are critically well received, which is a reasonable point to highlight.

Metacritic user averages are a bit more dubious, though Nintendo's scores there do I think reflect a relatively happy fanbase

 

[Nictel]

Translation: "We're not selling any consoles. The attach rate for third party games is almost zero but this mostly arbitrary number is high so please don't dump our stocks and give us more money. Now let's continue to Amiiboo!"

 

[Nosgotham]

I don't get the issue with Nintendo showing off the fact that their games are reviewed well.

 

[Kysen]

The lack of third party support helped them out here.

Yep averages are a bitch.

 

[EhoaVash]

Well... They gotta say something right or shares will keep dropping

Anyway Nintendo does make the best games in the industry

 

[Empty]

iwata has stated that improving people's quality of life is a goal for nintendo along with profit. he should be proud that people are enjoying their games a lot and metacritic is an easy way to demonstrate that, it's notable also that he cites the userscore as well as the professionals.

 

[Oregano]

Yes. Metacritic isn't perfect, but user scores are way off base. Look at the latest DmC or any game that has a controversy surrounding it.

That's why Nintendo is specifically taking both into account, rather than only taking critic's review or user reviews.

 

[IcyEyes]

That gif is a little bit old (except the seal, it's something new I guess) :

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=955663

but always funny!

 

[Kacho]

Metacritic user averages are a bit more dubious, though Nintendo's scores there do I think reflect a relatively happy fanbase

Indeed.

 

[jimi_dini]

Yes. Metacritic isn't perfect, but user scores are way off base. Look at the latest DmC or any game that has a controversy surrounding it.

"critic" scores are also way off base.

GTA IV - PS3 - 98/100
followed by
GTA IV: Gay Tony - PS3 - 89/100

That's simply madness. GTA IV on PS3 is almost unplayable because of the shitty framerate (and it's a bad game on top of that).

The user score (7.5/10, Gay Tony is 8.0/10 - at least that makes sense) is way more accurate than those "critic"

Spoiler

paid off

scores.

And then there is NieR sitting at 69/100 and the user score (8.4/10) is also way more accurate.

 

[zroid]

well it seems Metacritic really likes Nintendo too

 

[Phamit]

Other Publishers lives them even More, they put them in The contracts with dev studios.

 

[SerTapTap]

The real story was that ad abusing user score/retail to discount tons of games from other consoles--and I think they're just plain arbitrarily missing some I looked it up and there's almost 8 8.5+ (user and professional) scoring games on the Vita alone, a couple games are digital.

Basically, Metacritic is bullshit, Nintendo referring to Metacritic isn't particularly bullshit because it's a standard thing to do, but Nintendo misrepresenting/fudging Metacritic numbers brings the dial back to bullshit

The lack of third party support helped them out here.

Not really since they're counting in absolute numbers. ...there's also several third party games in their graphic

 

[Novel Mike]

I'm just going to quote myself from the reply I left on that article...

*Sigh* Not everyone has to hate metacritic because you and the rest of Kotaku does Brian. Of course Nintendo likes it, almost all of their games review well both by users and other journalists and metacritic being used to see all of those scores in 1 place is an easy way for Iwata to justify what they do with their games, as well with how well they sell.

I get the idea of hating on metacritic when certain companies use it to base bonuses off of but seriously just because your site no longer lists a '1-10 score' for reviews doesn't mean the rest of the industry does. I don't think there is any real wrong way to score a game and while you might claim that you no longer 'score' your games and the rest of the industry should follow your example in the end... you are still scoring games, just not on the 1-10 scale. Make no mistake, every game you give a rating of a Yes or a No to is a score, it may not be the 1-10 scale like metacritic uses but you are still giving it a rating and personally while I don't see anything wrong with that I am baffled that this site constantly makes remarks about other outlets giving games a review 'score' when you are doing the exact same thing, just not on a scale that metacritic can use for its site.

I've seen members of you're staff praise Eurogamer for droping the 1-10 scale but in the end they've just replaced it with a 1-4 scale just like Kotaku as a 1-2 scale. In the end they are measurable in one way or another, trying to claim you are better then anyone else just because your scale is smaller just seems silly to me.

Honestly I just find the whole made up controversy about review scores to be quite stupid. Is it bull shit for companies to base bonuses off of a meta critic score? Yes absolutely, but in the end I don't think changing your scale and claiming superiority over anyone else is any less bull shit. If you truly wanted to get rid of 'scores' as you claim you could easily get rid of the yes/no scale that you use, but you won't do that because by and large most people do not read more then a paragraph or two of a written review and without that you likely wouldn't get half as many clicks on you're reviews that you currently do.

Please don't pretend like you are so much better then everyone else when you really aren't. There isn't anything wrong with giving a game a 1-2 score like Kotaku does nor is there anything wrong with giving a game a 1-100 score, or a 1-5 score. Everything in gaming is rated one way or another, hell despite dropping the 'score' as you claim you have you still constantly list top 'insert system here' games lists which in the end is ranking what games are better then others which in the end isn't that exactly what you claimed you wanted to get away from? Sure they are not exactly the same thing but I just find it oddly hypocritical that 'scores' are bad (despite you still giving a game a score in the end) but listing what games are the best on whatever platform or genre are not? You just did a top 10 best horror games saying those 10 games by that authors opinion are better then all of the others, if you don't like to see games ranked because of a score then why do you rank games at all?

I think I'm largely just ranting at this point for very little reason as I don't see Kotaku changing but its just things like this that make me roll my eyes at articles like this. If you don't stand for scores or games being ranked on metacritic then why do you yourselves rank them one way or another? I don't think there is anything wrong with ranking games or giving games a score (as long as it makes sense, the 7-10 scale that most sites use is another discussion entirely) but I'm confused why you think this is a problem yet you still end up ranking games anyway either via top lists or giving a game a yes/no rating.