How Diablo 3 gave Metacritic a giant middle finger

@48: Ah, so it’s their fault. Good to know.

“Oh they cost money?

Oh you mean the ones for a smart phone! Right, tell the folks at home where you can sign up and have blizzard send you a free smart phone too…

Oh wait..”

You don’t need a smart phone to have one it works on majority of phones now days especially if you have updated in the last year. Just ignoring that and going for the service that tracks where you log in is good enough. I can tell you my wife doesn’t have an authenticator but she does use that service and she hasn’t been hacked ever where I was hacked 3 times prior to getting an authenticator and the service.

Not to mention you need to take care of your online accounts I even went with making an email account specifically for Blizzard related stuff and making an unique password just for bnet along with changing it every 2-3 months.

oh lol just admit what diablo 3 sux

@51

Yeah in a way it is for not taking care of their stuff, is it Blizzard’s fault that someone doesn’t use features that they have access to or change their passwords. Blizzard is a corporation and can’t keep track of every single persons activity at once especially so if someone isn’t taking care of their part.

I wonder if the Diablo III accounts will be attacked the way the Wow ones were/are. I would imagine so, considering the fact that real money value is attached to peoples in game items. Thats often the biggest motivation right there.

They already are OG, http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-05-21-diablo-3-accounts-hacked-gold-and-items-stolen

Damn Hunam, knew it was only going to be a matter of time. But the hackers got their stuff going faster then Blizzard did.

“Blizzard offers an Authenticator designed to provide extra security to your account. Donlan did not have the authenticator before the hack, but reports suggest accounts have been compromised even with this enabled.”

That is scary stuff right there. If the authenticator won’t stop them…

To be fair, I’m sure a lot of the “hacking” that goes on with Blizzard titles has to do with people being stupid and falling for phishing attempts. Just having a B.net account will get you spammed with tons of emails claiming to be about your WoW account (of which I have none) or from Blizzard saying you need to change your password, etc. I’m sure they’ve already changed their tactics to target Diablo 3; they’d probably have loads of success promising an exclusive method for playing the game offline or something.

@45 Wow, really? I’m unintelligent because my opinion differs from yours? I think with that statement you’ve made it clear that logic is not involved in your hatred. I don’t understand why you took my post as an attack against you (or your opinion), since I wasn’t even addressing you to begin with.

I fail to see, from a purely objective standpoint, how you can complain after the fact about something you explicitly agreed to purchase. There is a TOS and EULA; you agreed to them. If you decide later that you don’t agree, contact Blizzard for a refund and deprive them of your $60. Just don’t use that as the basis of your argument for why people shouldn’t purchase the product if you want to be taken seriously.

Wow! More history in the making! First, massive support for DRM! Power to the corporations!! And now.. I think loki is right. This is how low we ended up.

On one hand, going against metacritic is good, because it is too reliant, not so far as saying 88% is a low score, because that’s lunacy to say, but it does rear it’s head too much.

But this just reminds me of that lunatic Namco Bandai PR guy who was like “I can’t wait for reviews to go” because it literally means that people like him gain more power and more bad games will sell more because of marketing. Reviews are good, pre-release reviews are good. OK, not the way they are done, in hotels on microsofts time and dime, but trying to fuck reviews off all together is just idiotic for the consumer to go along with as they lose out.

Then again… time and time again as Blizzard have just shown, gamers are so desperate that you can make a great game and then hobble the fucking shit out of it with DRM and badly thought out features and people will still buy 2 million plus.

The problem really isn’t Metacritic, the problem is the lack of competent critics to feed it. Metacritic collects data, and it’s responsible for presenting it in a truthful and representative way, but the source of the problem is the reviewers who don’t know what they’re doing.

Obviously, an 88 is a stellar score for a game, if you look at it on its own. The problem is that you shouldn’t. An 88 on Rotten Tomatoes would be close to a must-have movie. Even on Metacritics TV section, an 88 would be a stellar show. In the game section however, an 88 is mediocre. 12 percentage points short of perfection = Halfassed game.

That’s not Metacritics fault. Even though you can argue with the wisdom of using an average of scores, that don’t actually share the same scale, what makes it untrustworthy is that games reviewers have managed to write their whole profession into the ground, to the point where those scales fail to make any sense. And the reviews often aren’t much better.

Pats point rings kinda hollow since the 88 is really only caused by that one 60′ish review. It’s hardly a corps of critics calling it like they see it, and more like one guy with the balls to punish them for a pretty shoddy launch.

Metacritic shines when every supposed professional review reads like a slightly different worded version of each other and the user reviews are the opposite.

Then Metacritic fails when reviews start appearing with perfect scores written by people traceable back to the game developer.

Oh and D3 is broken because its a single player game which is going to have server down-time. Thats broken and fucked beyond belief. 2 million people bought that.

Fuck those 2 million people.

“2 million people bought that.

Fuck those 2 million people.”

Why didnt they just read about these problems in reviews, or just read about the fact the game isnt all that great, which is what a lot of reviews seem to be saying? …Oh right, no reviews were out when people brought the game.

All i can say is i really like Resident Evil. Why does that matter? Well, whilst i always thought Resident Evil Operation Raccoon City looked iffy, i would have still brought it. Hell, i’d gotten pretty much every other Resident Evil game till then. But along came the day one reviews saying the game sucked beyond buyable levels, and my money was saved. The same happened with the Resident Evil 4 & Code Veronica HD re releases which -as day one reviews informed me- werent really all that ‘HD’. And lets not forget the Silent Hill Collection, now i didnt intend to get this because of the lack of SH4 but who knows, i really like SH2 & 3, yet informed by day one reviews, the ports were shoddy. Money save! These were all ‘big’ name franchises, right?

So now heres Pat, suggesting publishers remove the ability for gaming sites to inform me on whether i should get a game or not on day one. Say Pat, if as a result of your advice, i end up going off only what publishers say and get a game that sucks, will you refund me?

Not a good game? Oh ok. You never played it to begin with.

the only thing that reviewers don’t like is “Online issue” and “28 hours for Normal difficulty setting”, that’s it. Everything else is polished and done right.

Diablo III is a solid title.

Isn’t it clear, that when it comes to spending money, you make up your own opinion on the matter? So how, as a gamer, is your opinion made up? I would say by recommendations of friends who, and thats important, share your gaming taste. Than comes media reviews, and I apply the same rules here as with my friends, knowing, which journalist matches my tastes in the past. Only, that I need to read and watch more carefully to make up a decision, because you know, they aren’t my friends…… And than you have the user reviews, which are, especially on metacritic, often a “real life” comment by core gamers. They’ve already spend money on a game and they usually know what they are talking about. As always, you have to read a lot, to get an idea of that product.

Or, you can pre-order every game you hope to be good, believe what the hype tries to sell and don’t look back with no buyers remorse.

Edit: damn, I forgot a demo. A demo is absolutely useful to form an opinion….

I don’t care about reviews anymore for example because they are full of corruption and i can’t take them all seriously, as DSB said

“Obviously, an 88 is a stellar score for a game, if you look at it on its own. The problem is that you shouldn’t. An 88 on Rotten Tomatoes would be close to a must-have movie. Even on Metacritics TV section, an 88 would be a stellar show. In the game section however, an 88 is mediocre. 12 percentage points short of perfection = Halfassed game.”

My opinion is made up by my own experience (oldschool gamer), favorite developer and my best friend. Also, news sites like VG247 or Gametrailers that supports majority of videogame trailers helps me to decide if i want to buy a game. Sometimes marketing campaign helps me to decide to buy a game if it is flashy enough… i can’t do something about it. Devs just need to make a fantastic trailer and i will probably buy it in the end. I like games and blockbuster games and can’t miss them even if it has low score on metacritic.

Metacritic is not irrelevant. It’s good, but videogame section is full of corrupt practices. Every month, almost every week we get a stellar game or a masterpiece. It’s like videogame industry is without any flaws at all.

P.S. Hilarious thing is that a lot of journalists ignore shitty games with low budget and these games also require some serious attention. They are the same games as blockbuster games.

^ the last time I lost money on a pre-ordered game, based on what you said, was brink. That was the last time I pre-ordered a game. The Last Of Us is getting a pre-order, even if it would be a 5/10 btw.

^ Same situation. But i was lucky enough playing something else to be bothered with preorder, though i wanted this game because these guys were behind Quake Wars
2-5 days later my friends told me that it was crap, then i looked at the reviews and opinions and etc.

” The Last Of Us is getting a pre-order, even if it would be a 5/10 btw.”

Ahh, it won’t. In the world of corruption practices in the videogame industry it’s impossible for The Last Of Us to get a score lower then 90% on metacritic. Even if it is a real piece of garbage with shiny visuals.
Naughty Dog hype is in full motion right now. If you ask journalists “What to do you think about Naughty Dog?” Their answer will be^ “OMG, Damn!11 Amazing! Shocking” etc.

@66 I agree with all of that, but honestly critics should be able to fill a larger role than they do when it comes to videogames.

I think the best critics out there are the ones that are instantly familiar to you, whether you like them or not. A critic is supposed to fill the role of your friend, telling it like it is, being disappointed with things even though they’re popular, or being thrilled with things in spite of their flaws. Or they can fill the role of that guy you hate, who always gets it wrong, and always emphasizes the wrong things, which will still make their review quite useful in terms of how you might feel about the things they hate or prefer.

The vast majority of videogame critics just aren’t that good, and I think it’s interesting that you underline the fact that there’s a difference between your friend, who pays for a game, and a reviewer, who is spoonfed it.

A reviewer who is impressed with his level of access, or the junk he’s given is fucking lousy at his job. And sadly I think that goes for a lot of them out there.

WTF?!?! An 88 aggregate is a kiss of death for a AAA game? Are you insane?! An 88%…are you freaking kidding me. That is somehow bad? So any game that doesn’t receive a 90% on metacritic is a failure? Let’s see what other game didn’t get a 90% average yet sold millions of copies…hmmm. Oh that’s right! Modern Warfare 3, Black Ops, Battlefield 3, Max Payne 3, Left 4 Dead, Left 4 Dead 2, Witcher 2, Borderlands, SWTOR etc. Every single one of those games have sold millions of copies. CoD of course selling what 25 million in a day?

It’s also rubbish of you to think that a 90% game means insta sales. How many critically acclaimed games have bombed? Ico, Okami, Beyond Good & Evil. Need I go on? Not to mention the fact that actual rubbish games sell millions of copies. IE: Resident Evil and the 50 metacritic score it has.

I just don’t know if you are trolling or what. This age of a game must be a 90 or its fail is ridiculous. Also, the game would’ve been at a 90% if it wasn’t for that one 65% review. So just because ONE reviewer thought it was average and brought the score down the game is a failure critic wise? Just my god i don’t even know what to think. Wow…this article reeks of stupidity. I have never ever heard of a game getting a 88% aggregate be bestowed with a title of kiss of death to its sales or that it’s a bad game. Dear God…please don’t write anymore. You are part of the problem this industry is facing. That just because a game isn’t a 90% aggregate from a flawed system that contains scores from literally 100 different sites and opinions with no quality control means it failed review wise.

And look PC gamer review up. A 90%. But wait the average would still be an 88% on metacritic. What a failure game! OMG. Kids…if you get 88% on your tests you are a failure at life. GTFO.

PS: At least check your facts. Eurogamer reviewed it. 9/10

Did I read that right? The article’s point is that review aggregates are meaningless if they don’t affect the *sales* of a game? That’s news to me. I thought the point of reviews was to evaluate the *quality* of games.

Journos who review videogames are pretty much useless and they’re nothing short of necessary evil.

@21 – You can’t say that something has not had an affect without asking questions, or doing research on the subject. I can turn around and say it HAS affected it using my own personal experience because it did influence me. I don’t need to do anymore research to show that metacritic has at the minimum affected my decision to purchase this game, and by extensions, affected those friends which I dissuaded from the purchase.

the article author, being the journalist, has the burden of proof when he makes a statement on how a gaming website designed to help influence purchasing decisions has not been doing so. I find it a bit ridiculous that someone can sit back and say that a review website that gets a good deal of traffic does not affect consumer’s buying decisions at all. And because of this doubt, and my own personal choices, am calling bullshit on select statements given in this article because they have no factual basis whatsoever.

I’m going to try my best to be fair, while still trying to get my own opinion of the game across to those who care to take a gander. First, let me start off by saying that it’s not Blizzard’s intention to piss anyone off by putting in place a DRM that forces you to be online. If you think this a game changer, and won’t buy the game for that reason. Good luck. Life isn’t going to go the way you want it to. People aren’t going to give you whatever you want. In fact, most of the time, unless you bust your ass, you won’t ever get what you want. Dealing with things like an adult and being happy that you can even afford to blow $60 on a fucking game should be enough for you selfish little punks. So to all those who have such a hard time swallowing the pill that is big business, suck it up. It’s not going anywhere any time soon. Diablo III, IN MY OPINION, is a great game. Full of features and replayability and well worth the money. If you don’t like it, fuck off. Go play your facebook MMO’s and stupid smartphone games and leave the real gaming to those who can appreciate it. I’ve poured countless hours into the first two games as well as the expansion for Diablo II. I have been nothing but satisfied with this release. Going back to the DRM, it’s a security measure. Blizzard decided that piracy and account comprimisation were too much of a threat to not try it out. And you know what, who the fuck cares that you have to be online all the time! Where are you going to play Diablo other then your home? In the car? On a plane? In the park? Read a book for Christ’s sake. If you can’t be away from your game enough to enjoy the finer things in life, maybe you should spend your money elsewhere and not on video games. I’ve already put 30+ hours into the game, which is far less than most players already. That’s because I have a life other than Diablo. And I have many other games besides Diablo. So what if Blizzard forces you to be online. It’s not like they’re going to steal your shit. You just gave them $60. If anything they’re just trying to help you out. Oh, and to those who DO play video games all the damn time, I have nothing against it. But I do think you should try to get out more. It’s physically unhealthy to lock yourself up in your room for hours on end almost never leaving the house. Your body needs sunlight to operate properly. If you didn’t know that, look it up. Science is a bitch. Anyway, back to my point. Why are so many of you so jaded? It’s the same shit with movies. People are so spoiled by what the media has thrown at us as well as how you approach things of this nature, that you stop giving a shit. If we were to show Diablo III to Blizzard 15 years ago, they would have shit their pants. Look back 10.. no 5 YEARS ago, and see how far games and entertainment have come. Blizzard is a huge company and if what they’re doing seems a little mainstream, do some homework. From day 1 any company that makes money has only done what other people are doing. Breaking boundaries and shattering expectations. Blizzard is no different. With every release, it’s fresh and amazing. StarCraft II is like StarCraft with a new graphics engine and gameplay tweaks, which is PERFECT! The style of gameplay is what made these games so damn fun in the first place, so why not build on it instead of trying to make a different game. If Diablo III played anything other than how it does, I would be angry and Blizzard for not calling it something else. It wouldn’t be Diablo anymore. So until they make a game of a different name, don’t expect them to change their game. They shouldn’t have to. But little prissy bitches like all of you complain so much that lesser companies are forced to change their game, and then they go to shit. I’m proud of Blizzard ignoring Metacritic. Or any other form of numeric scale that puts their game on trial. Companies shouldn’t completely ignore reviewers, but they do need to reserve their feelings about it in order to create as they please instead of trying to cater to a bunch of money hungry ass-clowns with no respect for what games truly are. An art style. Game designers are artists too. And in this day and age, creativity is just another way to make a quick buck. Look at music. Even the underground shit that I listen to is starting to go a little mainstream. Rap used to be respectable, until the media saw it as a way to make money. Now everything is electro this and dubstep that. Take your heads out of your asses and look at the bigger picture. Learn to appreciate shit instead of comparing everything. See the uniqueness in games instead of what makes it worse than the other. Maybe then gaming can return to what it used to be back in the day.

Wow I thought Wulf was bad about posting his ego drivel but this guy takes the cake and look no indenting or helping with readability. The likelihood of someone reading that is slim to none.

Yes they did

(Indent)Phoenix, I wasn’t intending to post my ego, as you put it. Forgive me if passion doesn’t strike your fancy. I’ve read through many a forum just to see the same crap over and over. Just because no one else here has said what I’ve said, in as many words, doesn’t mean they’re not thinking the same thing. I’m sure you can understand that. I’ve read your comments as well and I respect what you have to say. Maybe you should try to respect what I have to say as well. You don’t have to read it, obviously, but don’t downcast what I have to say simply because you feel like you need to boost your OWN ego. Ignorance is a two way street my friend.

(Indent)Anyway, if you want a short version, stop bitching. If you don’t like the game, move on with your life and play something else but don’t blame Blizzard for not catering to your own preference. That’s not their job. They don’t get paid to make games that make EVERYONE happy. Diablo itself is a very unique flavor in the icecream shop of video games. It takes a unique palette to enjoy such a game. Much is true with most any game. So to say, “Diablo sucks because it doesn’t have what I like in it.” Is like saying “I don’t like the sun because it’s too bright.” It sounds just as stupid. Still a bit long, I know. But at least you get my point now. And I don’t mean to be rude Phoenix, but what you said was out of line. What I said was in line with what you had to say, and yet you disrespect me by saying I’m “posting my ego”. Yeah, because defending someone without obligation is a HUGE boost to my ego. Sure. Anyway, I’m going to slay some daemons. Peace on you!