My Naked Fanboyism

The following is an email I sent to Metacritic.com about their scoring system for games. Metacritic is a site that compiles critics' scores for movies, music, books and games from all over the internet and beyond and calculates weighted averages:

I've noticed that VGchartz.com reviews don't factor into your scores for games. At least not in the case of the Conduit for Wii so I assume this is generally true.

Respectfully I would like to ask why and urge you to include their reviews in your scores. There is a large debate around the legitimacy of reviews for Wii games right now, whether or not reviewers are reviewing for the average Wii owner or for themselves and their 'hardcore' gaming buddies. I believe the latter to be true. I would think that given the current debate around Wii scores you would want to include as much information as possible to calculate your Wii scores. Mathematically this would increase accuracy.

The problem is further evidenced when you look at the difference between your calculated scores for Wii games and the user scores. The average gamer enjoys Wii-game x, y or z much more than critics enjoy Wii-game x, y or z. Some critics are interested in one thing only, hardcore, high definition games. (There is more to gaming than HD-display systems and ultra-realistic graphics). Your user scores for Wii Sports and to a lesser extent The Conduit are inconsistent with critic scores. Frequently with these sorts of games there is a 10-percentage-point difference (or more) between Metacritic and the users' real opinions.

I find VGchartz to be fair and accurate in their assessment of games. Not only that, they are the number one source for monitoring game sales. This should make them a legitimate and reputable voice on games.

Sincerely

Concerned gamer CasualGamerGuy
Zach Gruber @ http://casualGamerGuy.blogspot.com/

Thanks for reading this. Check out my previous post on E3. Please leave comments.

E3 And Wii Games Reviews

The Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) recently held in Los Angeles showcased the future of video games. Sony and Microsoft both held impressive press conferences which outlined their plans to introduce motion-control schemes to their game systems. The mainstream gaming press' reaction was to pat Microsoft (and Sony to a lesser extent) on the back for their innovations. While their respective technologies look promising and game journalists' coverage of E3 simply reflects that, a voice calls out from the wilderness with a question: "aren't Microsoft and Sony simply jumping on the bandwagon Nintendo started rolling in 2006???" (2006 was the year that Nintendo revolutionized gaming with its motion controls on the Wii). Regardless, the press has crowned Microsoft and Sony as the 'winners' of this years expo while Nintendo's continuing impressive lineup of games is treated as a side note. There are two reasons for this.

The first is that lightning has struck so many times for Nintendo in the past few years that expectations are too high for the company to ever measure up. The Wii has become the fastest selling home video game console ever. It is currently sitting at around 50 million units sold and has birthed such phenomena as Wii Sports, Wii Fit, Mario Kart Wii and Super Smash Bros Brawl. If the Wii is a success, it's cousin the Nintendo DS is an outright triumph for the Japanese company. To date the portable system has sold over 100 million units, more than twice it's closest competitor, the Playstation Portable (PSP). And, DS hosts a library of software equally diverse to the Wii's, not to mention just as successful in the marketplace. Brain Age, New Super Mario Bros, and Nintendogs are three examples. The excitement that has grown around Nintendo over the last half-decade coupled with the nostalgia game journalists have for the company which first broke through in the 1980s is causing some of those who game and write about it to expect the moon, the stars, Jupiter, Uranus and M31 from Nintendo. Super Mario Galaxy won't suffice.

The second reason that the gaming media has overlooked Nintendo's performance at E3 is that those game journalists who aren't disappointed with Nintendo's inability to live up to unreasonable expectations never expected anything from Nintendo to begin with. The so called "core gamers" who thrive on Grand Theft Autos, God of Wars, and First Person Shooters only, make up a large portion of the gaming media. These people couldn't care less what Nintendo does because they are more concerned with how many hours the next PS3 or X-Box 360 exclusive will last them. They are interested in ultra realistic graphics and tight Joystick controls, not new interfaces such as motion control or colourful presentation. They wrote off Nintendo's E3 performance before they arrived at the show.

To oversimplify there are two kinds of game journalists, those who don't like Nintendo and those who like Nintendo but find themselves perplexed that each and every game on a Nintendo system isn't designed specifically for them. Wii Fit is an example of a game that erks people because it is expanding the gaming market to soccer moms and senior citizens while some gamers would prefer that gaming remain an old boys club (or rather, a young acne prone boys club. ages 16 to 25). But ultimately the presence of engaging experiences that appeal to a wider audience of people will have it's mark on the media that cover them. Microsoft and Sony's entry into the motion-control ring signifies the legitimacy of new interfaces in gaming along with new gamers; It took three years, but it happened. It may take longer for the gaming media to adapt to change, but ultimately they will have to.


This is my take on E3 and the casual games coverage debate. Please comment bellow on my opinions.