Battlefield 3 Devs Are All About The Review Scores

Recommended Videos

The Wooster

King Snap
Jul 15, 2008
15,305
0
0
Battlefield 3 Devs Are All About The Review Scores


Battlefield 3 producer Patrick Bach believes reviews - and Metatscores in particular - are a better indication of a game's quality than sales.

"You can argue that game quality has to do with sales, but it's not equal," Bach said, in an interview with Eurogamer [http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-10-24-battlefield-3-interview-rolling-the-dice-interview]. "You have to have enough game to reach sales. But it doesn't mean if you have a 95 rated game that would sell the most copies. An 85 rated game could sell way more copies than a 95 rated game, which is sad for the developer, because the developer then gets a receipt on that: you made a great game, and then the sales tell you that you didn't make a great game."

It's a hard point to argue with. Going by sales data: Duke Nukem Forever is pretty good, Ubisoft's execrable Imagine: Babyz is better than Okami and Call of Duty: Black Ops is the best game ever made. I'm not sure which part of that sentence is the most awful. Bach doesn't believe direct user feedback is much use either.

"The other thing you have is consumer feedback, as in forum posts. You can't use that because it's mostly people being very upset with stuff. It's not very often you have a thread on how awesome something is. Well you get that sometimes with videos and stuff, but general threads are mostly complaints."

So what metric does DICE go by?

"You could argue that reviews are the most objective feedback you can get as a game developer," he said. He then went on to confirm that Battlefield 3 does have a Metascore [http://www.metacritic.com/] target, but wouldn't reveal what it was. Considering Battlefield 3 has garnered a very positive response thus far, with the all-important numerical scores hovering around the nine-and-up range, it seems unlikely the game will fail to meet its targets. That being said, the veracity of Battlefield 3's current Metascore has been questioned after publications in Norway accused publisher EA of cherry picking reviewers [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/113707-EA-Accused-of-Gaming-Battlefield-3-Review-Scores] last week.

Source: Eurogamer [http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-10-24-battlefield-3-interview-rolling-the-dice-interview]


Permalink
 

bit_crusherrr

New member
Jan 21, 2011
50
0
0
By that logic Dragon Age 2 is the best game I've played this year. DA2 was fucking awful compared to DA:O. Infact I'd rather play DNF than DA2.
 

rapidoud

New member
Feb 1, 2008
547
0
0
Patrick Bach also commits public slander against activision, begging for a law suit.

I see where the stat kiddies that will be playing BF3 get their ideals from, it's all about the stats to say how good you are when no one else cares.
 

SovietSecrets

iDrink, iSmoke, iPill
Nov 16, 2008
3,975
0
0
They only say that because they know most likely BF3 won't outsell MW3. Though it can go both ways absolutely. Its a combination of both, not just one or the other.
 

The Wooster

King Snap
Jul 15, 2008
15,305
0
0
EcksTeaSea said:
They only say that because they know most likely BF3 won't outsell MW3. Though it can go both ways absolutely. Its a combination of both, not just one or the other.
Their respective qualities aside, I don't think BF3 has a chance of outselling MW3. Each COD game has outsold it's BF competitor by about 4:1.
 

SovietSecrets

iDrink, iSmoke, iPill
Nov 16, 2008
3,975
0
0
Grey Carter said:
EcksTeaSea said:
They only say that because they know most likely BF3 won't outsell MW3. Though it can go both ways absolutely. Its a combination of both, not just one or the other.
Their respective qualities aside, I don't think BF3 has a chance of outselling MW3. Each COD game has outsold it's BF competitor by about 4:1.
I agree. I really don't see BF beating MW in terms of sales anytime soon at all.
 

ph0b0s123

New member
Jul 7, 2010
1,689
0
0
So games are now where movies have been for a while, where how good a movie / how well it is reviewed, does not match up with it's box office performance. COD is so the Fast and Furious of the gaming world....
 
Feb 13, 2008
19,430
0
0
You could also go by the slanderous reaction to certain ad campaigns.
Or the death threats forwarded from the release of Origin.
Or the problem that you're having to employ retail staff to open every damn brick/mortar shop at midnight.

But going with "If they're that stupid, why should we even bother updating the game?" probably isn't it.
 

cgentero

New member
Nov 5, 2010
279
0
0
I really have to disagree with this guy, forum word of mouth is a far more reliable indicator of a games quality than both reviews and sales. There are threads of people complaining and hating, but generally are people pretty good about it.
 

mjc0961

YOU'RE a pie chart.
Nov 30, 2009
3,847
0
0
He said, knowing full well that Battlefield 3 will never outsell Modern Warfare 3, but still looking for a way to win the pissing contest.

Grey Carter said:
Ubisoft's execrable Imagine: Babyz is better than Okami
If Imagine: Babyz has controls that work properly, damn right it's better than Okami. Okami rates with stuff like ET for the 2600 and Big Rigs Over the Road Racing thanks to its awful, unresponsive, broken controls.
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
Wow, invite all the whining about people "ruining" a metascore.

I have news. Sales don't determine how good or bad a game is, but it's an outright lie to try and say sales are not as important as reviews. All game companies are for profit. Meaning that making art falls a distant second to making money. I hate this kind of thing, if for no other reason than we have all been burned by reviews, professional or otherwise. And if a game gets a fantastic review, and it's sales suck, it's because you have made a great game no one want to play, so that is a fail. I seem to recall a company called Team Bondi, who made a game that did pretty darn good in the review area, but sales sucked horribly, and now they are not around anymore.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
rapidoud said:
Patrick Bach also commits public slander against activision, begging for a law suit.

I see where the stat kiddies that will be playing BF3 get their ideals from, it's all about the stats to say how good you are when no one else cares.
It's also all about the stats that YOU decided to make relevant, since sales figures and review scores are both stats.
 

RA92

New member
Jan 1, 2011
3,079
0
0
Grey Carter said:
EcksTeaSea said:
They only say that because they know most likely BF3 won't outsell MW3. Though it can go both ways absolutely. Its a combination of both, not just one or the other.
Their respective qualities aside, I don't think BF3 has a chance of outselling MW3. Each COD game has outsold it's BF competitor by about 4:1.
Yeah, it probably won't. But after $100 million+ ad campaign, I'm curious about how they compare.
 

rapidoud

New member
Feb 1, 2008
547
0
0
So indie titles that are very good but don't sell well (because they are independent) are somehow poor games? What if they're doing it because they like doing it first, then using the money from sales to support themselves?

Anyway, Patrick's trying to provide a support cushion if BF3 sales don't do so well so he doesn't look like a complete.... meanie.
 

nukethetuna

New member
Nov 8, 2010
542
0
0
I wonder if he'd say the same thing if it was doing poorly on reviews. I also wonder if he's banking on it to score higher than MW3? It'd be interesting if MW outdid it in sales AND score. I'd hope he'd acknowledge it as the superior game.

Anyways, even if he's right and it is a better indicator of quality, the games with the sales are the ones most likely to get sequels and to live on.

Disclaimer: I couldn't care less about shooters, I just always find it specific when people say these things. Like with RAGE where the developer said "consoles are a pain to develop for" and swapped right to "consoles are the future of gaming" when his PC version was riddled with errors.
 

PeePantz

New member
Sep 23, 2010
1,100
0
0
Baresark said:
Wow, invite all the whining about people "ruining" a metascore.

I have news. Sales don't determine how good or bad a game is, but it's an outright lie to try and say sales are not as important as reviews. All game companies are for profit. Meaning that making art falls a distant second to making money. I hate this kind of thing, if for no other reason than we have all been burned by reviews, professional or otherwise. And if a game gets a fantastic review, and it's sales suck, it's because you have made a great game no one want to play, so that is a fail. I seem to recall a company called Team Bondi, who made a game that did pretty darn good in the review area, but sales sucked horribly, and now they are not around anymore.
This is taken right from wikipedia: Sterne Agee analyst, Arvind Bhatia, is optimistic that L.A. Noire has 'potential' for 4 million sales.[115] To date L.A. Noire has shipped 4 million copies to retailers.

Also, it's worth noting that when released in May, it had the highest sales during that month with just under one million.

Sales weren't the problem.
 

josemlopes

New member
Jun 9, 2008
3,950
0
0
Grey Carter said:
"The other thing you have is consumer feedback, as in forum posts. You can't use that because it's mostly people being very upset with stuff. It's not very often you have a thread on how awesome something is. Well you get that sometimes with videos and stuff, but general threads are mostly complaints."
But isnt that good? It means that the community noticed some flaws in the game that can be improved, did he really wanted a bunch of guys just saying that the game is the second coming of Jesus and leave it as it is?
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
Yes, because the 7-10 point review scale used these days is such a great indicator of quality.