No Rest for the Wicked Dev Unveils Aggregator, Calls Critics “Untrustworthy”
Thomas Mahler, the visionary mind behind the Ori series and the upcoming action-RPG No Rest for the Wicked, has launched a new website that’s poised to shake up the gaming review landscape. This isn’t just another aggregator; it’s Mahler’s bold response to Metacritic and OpenCritic, designed to address what he sees as a critical flaw in those platforms: their reliance on potentially biased professional critics.
A New Approach to Aggregation
This new platform, VideoGamesCritic, flips the script by prioritizing user scores, giving them two-thirds of the weighting compared to professional critic reviews. The methodology involves combining critic scores from OpenCritic with “user scores” derived from Steam reviews, employing a complex “trust-weighted” system. This allows the site to assess how closely critic opinions align with player sentiment and even evaluate the accuracy of individual gaming publications.
This isn’s the first time Mahler has spoken out about the perceived disconnect between critics and players. Last year, Thomas Mahler lamented the dangerous cruelty of Steam reviews, claiming that “review bombing” could bankrupt his studio, Moon. While this claim was met with skepticism, given that No Rest for the Wicked hadn’t actually been review bombed at the time, Mahler doubled down, accusing the press of misrepresenting his statements and even making transphobic remarks. Now, he’s launching a project that places immense trust in those same Steam reviewers he once criticized.
In an announcement on In a post on X, Mahler explained his reasoning: “My main problem with the existing aggregators: Their scores tell you how the press felt about a game, not how players did.” He added that VideoGamesCritic addresses this by giving two-thirds of the weight to player opinions. “Press still counts, it just can’t outvote the people who bought the game.”
https://t.co/hy00lYYoXA Hey folks,
I’m launching a website today:
It started as a little database I built for myself. I use Metacritic and OpenCritic a lot and they’re clearly useful, but to me as a designer the user experience always felt a bit lacking.
Then the thing kept…
Accounting for Updates and Evolution
Beyond simply prioritizing player opinions, Mahler’s new platform aims to address another critical issue: the static nature of traditional review aggregators. He rightly points out that the Metascore for games like No Man’s Sky remains fixed at their launch state, failing to reflect the significant improvements and changes made over time. To account for this evolution, VideoGamesCritic gives more weight to recent Steam reviews.
While Steam reviews offer a binary choice between recommending or not recommending a game, Mahler believes he has a system in place to mitigate potential issues like review bombing. Reviews from users with less than two hours of playtime are heavily downweighted, while those with over ten hours receive more credence. The platform also utilizes Steam’s built-in review detection mechanisms and even factors in whether a game was activated using a Steam key to prevent manipulation.
read it all here And because it’s all math, Mahler argues it’s transparent and free from bias. This is, of course, debatable, given that the weighting system reflects Mahler’s own biases. Nevertheless, he has created a platform where he can express his vision for how games should be evaluated.
“Reviewing the Reviewers”
Perhaps the most controversial aspect of VideoGamesCritic is its approach to evaluating individual gaming publications. Mahler introduces the concept of “reviewing the reviewers,” assessing each outlet based on how closely their opinions align with player sentiment. This involves analyzing whether critics consistently call games the way players see them, providing a unique perspective on the accuracy and reliability of different sources.
While this approach may seem simplistic, it raises important questions about the role of criticism in the gaming landscape. Is the primary purpose of a review to predict how the wider public will react? Or should it delve deeper, exploring the nuances of gameplay and design? While Mahler’s system prioritizes alignment with player sentiment, it overlooks the value of personal reflection and subjective interpretation that can enrich the critical experience.
Even when a publication doesn’s assign scores, like Kotaku, VideoGamesCritic attempts to quantify their opinions. This involves analyzing their “recommend/pan” calls, assessing their accuracy, alignment with player sentiment, and even considering which side they take when critics and players disagree. While this approach may seem unconventional, it highlights the challenges of quantifying subjective opinions and the inherent biases that can influence critical assessments.
Ultimately, VideoGamesCritic represents a bold experiment in gaming criticism. Whether it will revolutionize the way we evaluate games remains to be seen. However, it undoubtedly sparks important conversations about the role of critics, the importance of player feedback, and the ever-evolving landscape of gaming culture.
Comments
Be the first to comment.