Official "People Care Too Much About Metacritic Scores" Says Grasshopper CEO, Suda51

[Sphinx]

Suda suggested that one reason is publishers and developers focusing too much on Metacritic scores, and deciding to play it safe and stick to what is conventionally known to ‘work’ instead of taking risks with new ideas.

“Everybody pays too much attention to and cares too much about Metacritic scores,” he said. “It’s gotten to the point where there’s almost a set formula – if you want to get a high Metacritic score, this is how you make the game.

He continued:

“if you’ve got a game that doesn’t fit into that formula, that marketability scope, it loses points on Metacritic.

Grasshopper CEO Suda51 says people ‘care too much’ about Metacritic scores | VGC

“What’s important to us is putting the games out that we want to put out”…

www.videogameschronicle.com

 

[HunterofHuntss]

I’ve played plenty of low-scoring games that I really enjoyed, and just as many highly-rated ones that didn’t do much for me.

 

[James Sunderland]

The problem now is that Metacritic has so many random, low-quality websites affiliated with it. These clickbait sites copy a wiki description, throw in words like "awesome" or "cool," and call it a review. They barely write 100 words and probably didn’t even play the game.

I used to be like this as a kid, thinking I had to avoid anything rated lower than 80 on Metacritic. Thankfully, I’ve grown past that. There’s plenty of good stuff even in the 60s that I’ve really enjoyed.

 

[Gooneytunes]

At the end of the day, it’s all about personal taste. Even if a city-building game or RTS got 100% on Metacritic and everyone insisted it was the best game ever, I’d still avoid it because those genres just aren’t for me.

Metacritic should be seen as a general guide, not the final word on what to play.

 

[Ghost]

While I appreciate his games for what they are, if my work consistently got mediocre reviews like his, I’d probably make the same excuses.