<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The landscape of the video game industry has changed dramatically in recent decades, and platforms like Metacritic play a significant role in evaluating games that come to market. However, this influence is not without its critics, despite the importance of the score there for many companies. A growing number of voices are questioning whether Metacritic truly reflects quality, or whether it simply shows whether a title is sufficiently polished or optimized at the time of release.<\/p>\n
The case of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 is peculiar<\/a><\/span>, as it is listed on the Metacritic website with a score of 73 out of 100 after reviews from around 70 media outlets. Many journalists and content creators have pointed out that the post-apocalyptic shooter has many bugs and could use some optimization. However, after a massive launch patch, many of these issues have been minimized, and the title is very enjoyable, despite the fact that several updates are still needed to perfect the experience.<\/p>\n After S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 sold 1 million copies and debuted on Steam with nearly 120,000 concurrent players, Valve’s store shows that the game’s reviews are “mostly positive.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Many feel that the game’s score does not reflect reality. This view is shared by renowned developer Raphael Colantonio, founder of Arkane Studios, creator of Dishonored and Prey.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Colantonio criticized the review site’s system on X\/Twitter for encouraging the creation of boring games. He argued that a high score is more about how polished a game is than about how memorable the title is. “The Metacritic ecosystem encourages devs to make safe boring games. As long as a game is polished at launch, you’re guaranteed a 80%, no matter how boring the game might be,” he says.<\/p>\n “Meanwhile Stalker2 gets a 73 because it’s a bit rough on the edges at launch. Unfair, misleading.” He qualifies his words in another post. “My previous post was a bit controversial. Hopefully this one will be received better: 70% on Metacritic can either mean it’s a mediocre game or it’s an amazing game that has bugs at launch and needs patching. I don’t think Metacritic helps in making the difference between the 2.”<\/p>\n Source: Steam<\/a><\/span>, X<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n The Metacritic ecosystem encourages devs to make safe boring games. — Raphael Colantonio (@rafcolantonio) November 23, 2024<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\nArkane founder criticizes Metacritic system after S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 score<\/h3>\n
\n
As long as a game is polished at launch, you\u2019re guaranteed a 80%, no matter how boring the game might be.
Meanwhile Stalker2 gets a 73 because it\u2019s a bit rough on the edges at launch.
Unfair, misleading..<\/p>\n