Review score aggregator Metacritic has begun offering listings for individual game developers, providing something of a profile page with an aggregate score for all the work on which one has been credited. Although aggregates for the work of prominent developers, like Ken Levine, Peter Molyneux and Cliff Bleszinski (89, 82 and 86, respectively) are available, all developers with credits on Metacritic-ranked games can find their profile through the first name-hyphen-last name format in the URL. The data pulls from GameFAQs, with which Metacritic shares a parent. As such, info is far from complete; numerous industry veterans have told Gamasutra that their Metacritic page represents only a partial profile of games they've shipped. Under its frequently-asked questions, Metacritic recommends that developers submit additions and changes in their crediting directly to GameFAQs. A developer's Metacritic profile shows his or her highest-scored title, his or her lowest-scored title, and an average score, along with a list of the individual games on which they've worked and the role they played therein. "Man, it's bad enough games are judged by Metacritic," quips one multiplayer designer with six years in the industry anonymously to Gamasutra. "Now I'm going to be, too?" Metacritic has ranked companies as a whole for some time; in 2010 Take-Two was the company with the highest overall portfolio score.[/p] Source
I don't know how valid this is... Shigeru Miyamoto has a metacritic score of 80. He has produced about 25 games that are above 90, with 3 of the top games on Metacritic attributed to him. http://www.metacritic.com/person/shigeru-m...r-options=games Ken Levine only has 7 games attributed to him, with only 3 above 90. Metacritic's scoring should be more than just an average.
I agree, the problem is sites like this never have any sort of weighted modifier to their scoring. Some guy with one game at 95% will end up rated higher than a guy like Miyamoto despite the fact the man is to video games what Stan Lee is to comics. And the scores are individually skewed because millions more play Miyamoto's games and are more reviewed as a result. Meanwhile, American McGee is currently at a _very_ generous 86 despite being terrible. Miyamoto could produce a game of anime sprites eating pixelated excrement and it would still be better than McGee on his best day. And it wouldn't cause the sort of brain damage that playing Bad Day LA will induce. The face that Peter Molyneux still has a job in the industry, let alone an 82 onn this site is all the evidence you need that the ranking is meaningless.
They list Satoshi Tajiri as original artist and author for Pokémon Ranger series. While that's true, it's not his fault developers of that games did not produced a good game. (Assuming they are not good games)
An average is an average. Just because his name is behind Mario doesn't mean he gets special treatment. It's not like Ocarina of Time or Super Mario Bros. net him some extra brownie points.
The Pokemon Ranger games are good, maybe not great, though. Also, it is his fault, he could have made any changes he wanted to.
That's a pretty ignorant thing to say towards one of the greatest video game innovators of all time. Maybe a younger kid like you wouldn't understand.
It doesn't matter. My favorite game of all time is Ocarina of Time. But that doesn't mean his crap work just get's tossed out because he's great gaming innovator.
A developer ranking system which puts Miyamoto on the same level as some random guy who churned out one passable game is completely worthless.
I don't think the scoring really matters anyway. I know if I'm looking at game scores I won't look at dev scores. Maybe before the game comes out but I'd rather wait for the individual game scores. This seems more like a fluff feature on the site.
