The role reviews play in the video game industry today cannot be understated. Whether you’re talking about the writer, who gets to voice his/her opinion, the outlet, which gains traffic, readership and develops relationships, or the audience, which gets valuable purchasing advice, video game reviews serve many different purposes for many different people.

But what of those who provide the product to be reviewed? Do game developers let mediocre reviews get them down? Do review scores surprise them, or do developers know what's coming? We spoke to several individuals involved in developing and publishing video games to find out.

Tense Moments

“ It’s tense, because you usually don’t have an idea of what anyone is thinking.

Daniel Loment, former Associate/Assistant Software Engineer at EA Sports on the Madden NFL franchise, witnessed the time leading up to the first reviews, even though they didn’t necessarily affect him directly in his role. “There was a lot of built up anticipation since there was such an overhaul of the game. We made some major changes and expected the reviews to be positive,” he said. “I was not in a position where I would have to complete a major patch or add in a major feature for post-release patches which may have or may have not been assigned because of negative reviews. Though, most of the engineers did read most of the reviews just to see what kind of appreciation existed for our hard work for that year.”

For Drew Holmes, former Lead Writer at Irrational Games on BioShock Infinite, the moment the first review went live on IGN could only be described as surreal. “It’s always great to see someone react positively to your work,” he said. “With Infinite, I think there was a lot of nervousness because there was so much pressure to deliver. You’re following up one of the greatest games ever made and it’s like ‘Okay, go do that again.’ So part of it is excitement at the positivity, but a huge part is also ‘Oh my God we didn’t screw it up!’”

Loading

Manage Expectations

One way to avoid the stress of the first reviews is to manage expectations within the team. “Part of our job is to be the voice of reason internally when it comes to review,” said Justin Kranzl, Public Relations Manager at Square Enix. “You’ll obviously get outliers – reviews that go way under where you expect. Your job is to provide context internally to help the people that matter – the creative people making the games – understand that reviews can be extremely subjective and at times inaccurate and/or unfair.”

“ It was an accomplishment just to get that thing finished. I don’t think there was a single person on the team surprised by the scores.

It may be rare for developers to be blindsided by review scores, but it certainly can happen, especially when a reviewer misses the point of what the game was working to accomplish. “It’s perfectly valid for a critic or a reviewer to say ‘Hey, this is not what I expected and this is not what I want,’ and then reactive negatively or write it off,” Chester said. “But on the other hand, you sort of want to shake them or get into their head, address all of their criticisms, and make them understand your every intent. Of course, that’s not possible -- so yeah, it can be frustrating.”

Loading

Scoring Blues

That frustration can be furthered if the outlet in question is on Metacritic, which both Holmes and Kranzl agree has far too much emphasis put on it. “I think its rise is a sad development for consumers, media and people who make games for a living,” Kranzl said. “Any time you can dumb down what can be years of collective effort into a figure -- and expect that one figure to be an accurate summation of a creative work’s worth -- it’s counter to logic. […] I’m more sanguine about review scores in general. I think they detract from one of the great joys of just reading or watching someone’s opinion and weighing up yourself after what’s important to you.”

Holmes agreed with Kranzl. “You’ve got publishers building bonus targets off hitting a 90, 95,” he said. “It’s absurd. What is the difference between an 85 or 90 or 95?”

“ The criticism can feel personal, and it can really send you into a mental spiral.

Negative reviews can be a deterrent for trying new things, though they aren’t the only factor at play. “With the bigger games, schedule and budget are what often prevent developers from trying new things. A negative review is just the tangible result,” said Holmes. “The big publishers are often scared to bet on the unknown -- and the reasons are valid. That’s what makes the indie studios so important; to show everyone that you can be experimental and commercially viable at the same time.”

Loading

Mixed Reviews

Loment understands that every decision made during the development cycle carries weight in this regard. “The issue is that some managers do not want to risk something that may end of with a bad rating from Metacritic,” he said. “If a game has a certain style or has certain legacy features, then fans and reviewers get attached, which in turn limits the developers to be creative within a box. This mindset causes the higher end managers who make the big decisions on feature changes to take a longer time to gamble on great ideas or risky ideas.

“ If a game has a certain style or has certain legacy features, then fans and reviewers get attached, which in turn limits the developers to be creative within a box.

Even though review scores are important to those involved in making the game, in the end, if the community enjoys it, that’s more important to developers. “The intention is always to make a great game, and part of that is delivering on audience and community expectations,” Chester said. “So if your community is vocally very positive, you’ve done something right.”

In Loment’s situation working on Madden NFL 13, it was a combination of reviews and player feedback that drove how the studio supported the game post-launch. “I am not sure if it was negative reviews or the amount of extreme customer negative feedback that made some decisions in the post-release patches, but certain features, which were deemed not in scope for that year’s product, somehow made their way into the post-release patches,” he said. “Usually the reviews can account for the same issues which customers are not happy with; the reviews don’t come off as passionate as the customers do.”

“ I can’t tell you the number of ‘top rated’ games that I played and a month later cannot remember a single moment from... 90% of games aren’t actually about anything.

Despite the importance we as an industry put on reviews, Holmes argues they should play a lesser role in the big picture. “Did it entertain you? Did it move you? Would you recommend it? Did it stick with you after you finished?” Holmes posed. “I can’t tell you the number of ‘top rated’ games that I played and a month later cannot remember a single moment from. It’s rare that I play something so compelling that I go back and experience it again years later because 90% of games aren’t actually about anything. At the end of the day, that’s what should matter. […] We need to stop trying to be cool and start actually saying something.”

Ultimately, reviews should never be viewed as the final word on a game. Instead, they're guidelines for readers to apply to their own personal taste. If a review gives a game a 7.0 and cites poor multiplayer a one of the game's issues, but you don't intend on playing the multiplayer, you can synthesize that review and conclude that you might be very likely to enjoy the game more than the critic - and that's OK.

Do you think reviews have too much emphasis put on them in the games industry? How do reviews affect you as a reader of a video game outlet? Would you prefer to see a major shake-up in terms of how reviews appear on sites and magazines? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!

Brian P. Shea is a freelance games journalist and former rock music journalist. You can follow him on Twitter at @BrianPShea.