Adam Sessler Bashes Metacritic, Video Game Marketing

Adam Sessler bashes Metacritic, saying that an industry that depends so heavily on review scores is a broken system, and video games should be more like Hollywood where (in his own words) "piss-poor quality products" like Avatar can succeed with good enough marketing.

Read Full Story >>
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
Erimgard2477d ago

I can agree that it's unfair that some companies determine pay based on review scores (whether or not game sales are profitable) but why on earth would you want "piss-poor" games to succeed? That doesn't seem like a step forward for the industry at all.

Why o why2477d ago (Edited 2477d ago )

Im glad others feel this way. Metacritic has been a tool for ages. Zero transparency on why they give some sites greater weighing than others. I did notice many western sites high up on the list that metacritic tried to debunk the other week.....they still didn't explain why movie sites had greater credence than dedicated gaming sites or what their weighing was.

The fact peoples livelihoods could be changed because of a metascore already shows me it has become too important in the gaming industry.

Another thing why meta is broken is because some of the sites it gets its numbers from are broken. Look how many scandals have been exposed during this gen so if you put crap in you'll only get crap out the other side with a sprinkle of un transparent weighing

Reibooi2477d ago (Edited 2477d ago )


He doesn't want bad games to succeed he wants to see the people who make a game paid. I remember hearing how Obsidian missed out on a Bonus when working on New Vegas because it was ONE POINT lower then what Bethesda wanted it to get rated on metacritic. However we all know New Vegas was a success.

What Adam meant is that Hollywood makes crap movies that make a crap ton of money and get trashed in the reviews but that industry pays the people who worked on it because that is what a company should do.(he refers to Twilight as a example. Made tons of money but is crap and reviews reflected that) The person did their job and should be paid regardless of if it wasn't reviewed as well as would be liked by the publisher.

Erimgard2477d ago

I understand the point he's driving at, and people should get paid the full amount regardless, but games selling on name/advertising alone and then getting backlash from gamers is just as big of an issue as the messed up rating system.

There needs to be a balance between marketing push and reviews, because if either one gets too much relevance, someone's going to get burned. Either the developer or the consumer.

Blaze9292477d ago (Edited 2477d ago )

is it me or does it seem like Adam Sessler has been talking a lot lately o_O?...more than usual?

Reibooi2477d ago

It's because he doesn't work at G4 now and he doesn't have to censor himself. He basically can say whatever he wants to say when he has a thought because no one above him is telling him not to. He just thinks of something and posts a video. It didn't used to be like that when he was at G4.

Rupee2477d ago

He's got a website/YouTube channel thats picking up speed. The related video is part of his show. A weekly segment called "Sessler's Something".

christheredhead2477d ago

Adam has always been spot on with his stance against Metacritic. The site is only beneficial for PR, marketing and publishers/devs in certain instances. Otherwise, Metacritic is fairly irrelevant for gamers and I still see no purpose in the site.

I've always hated the number system and Metacritic makes the problem much worse. People get enraged over scores all the time and it makes no sense. Reviews are always opinion based and so is the score attached. Anytime someone brings up Metacritic in a debate or topic I just shake my head in embarassement.

SaffronCurse2477d ago

Get rid of the number system= problem solved.

BanBrother2477d ago

Yes chris, he has always been tough on Metacritic.

Fair enough as well. Some Publishers are using those scores to determine whether employees get a bonus or not (yes, people who have spent many sleepless nights making the game and who have families to feed). Then you get those a-holes like Tom Chick who gives games with universal acclaim 2/10 or something absurd.

Also, love how metacritic puts a percentage on everything. Many reviewers who use the star system like Sessler are annoyed at that. They view 4 stars being equivalent to a 9/10 by most people, whereas metacritic does a basic math 'solution' and says 80%.

They are basically putting a number on a review, which the person who reviewed the game disagrees with sometime. Sessler did a speech on this a while ago in front of the gaming media.

wishingW3L2477d ago

what I despise about Metacritic is that it has unknown gaming websites like "Xboxic" having more weight toward the average than a much more well known and respectable site like the GiantBomb (funded by Jeff Gerstmann). It really blows my mind and it makes absolutely no sense at all.

Tundra2477d ago

I honestly only rely on myself or friends for games. On meta, it's either the user reviews are plagued by fanboys against the game or review sites seemingly being paid off for high scores. It's hard to trust anything on that site.

LOGICWINS2477d ago (Edited 2477d ago )

Here's the reason why critics of the movie/music industries aren't afraid to give poor reviews:

Because consumers will buy music/movie tickets despite bad reviews.

Music and movie tickers cost somewhere from $6-$20(depending if your watching a 3D movie). This is a small investment.

Games on the other hand are $60(a large investment). Therefore, the value of the opinion of a game critic is more valuable than that of a movie/music critic because the investment for a game is 3x as much as the investment for movie.

The more expensive the content your buying is, the more reliance there is on reviews. THATS why Metacritic is more detrimental to games than it is for music/movies.

Unless they are fans of the developer or prior installments of the game, most gamers WILL pay attention to reviews since it helps diminish the risk of blowing $40-$60 on a bad game.

Erimgard2477d ago

Agreed entirely. Which is why it's all the more important that reviews be as accurate and unbiased (or unweighted especially in the case of Metacritic) as they can be. Unfortunately, that's now how things are right now, and some developers suffer as a result.

Outside_ofthe_Box2477d ago

***"most gamers WILL pay attention to reviews since it helps diminish the risk of blowing $40-$60 on a bad game."***

You finally understand. This is why it's important for reviewers to be as unbiased as possible.

I also feel that metacritc needs to take into account that 7/10 from one site may not necessarily be equivalent to a 7/10 from another site.

Show all comments (28)
The story is too old to be commented.