Ben-DutkaUpdate: This has been misinterpreted in several places. As it turns out, Sega isn't de-listing reviews from Metacritic; they're "de-listing" in terms of retail. They just won't make their low-scoring (i.e., the Metacritic reference) titles available to the public anymore. Sorry for the confusion.
Original Story:
You know how little kids cover their eyes after doing something bad, as if to say, "it didn't happen! If I don't see it, it didn't happen; it's not my fault"?
To get a look at how critics receive a particular title, fans flock to sites like Metacritic and GameRankings. It's basically doing your homework before opting to drop the cash. …but what if the game you searched for wasn't there? In order to "increase the value of the brand," Sega has actually de-listed certain low-scoring Sonic games at Metacritic. You know, so they don't "confuse the consumer." This according to MCV citing Sega Senior Vice President, Jurgen Post.
"Any Sonic game with an average Metacritic has been de-listed. We have to do this and increase the value of the brand. This will be very important when more big Sonic releases arrive in the future.
We could make a lot of money on back-catalogue Sonic titles, but let’s keep the number of Sonic games available under control. Otherwise you can have cannibalisation. If there are ten Sonic games on the shelves, with people seeing Sonic Rush DS or Sonic Rush Adventure, this may not help our overall strategy."
Sega is preparing to launch a few new Sonic titles soon, including the more old-fashioned downloadable for the PSN/XBLA, Sonic 4 , as well as Sonic Colors and Sonic Free Riders . Basically, Sega says they want to cater to both old and new fans of the speedy blue icon, and they don't want past failures tainting the new projects.
But…you can't erase your past. You did it. It's there. They're really going to take crappy Sonic games off Metacritic just because they were crappy? What if that starts to be the vogue thing to do…? Honestly, we didn't even know you could do this.
What the? This is odd. Even if they de-list the old Sonic games, the reviews are still there. And how on earth can they remove something from Meta-critic? Bribing?
Last edited by WolfCrimson on 10/7/2010 10:54:40 AM
Lame, that's very lame.
Sega is such a disgraceful company. They survive because of their past legacy, yet today the majority of their games are some of the most poorly designed and lowest reviewed in the industry.
Last edited by Temjin001 on 10/7/2010 11:00:14 AM
Dude! I want this man's gall and power to abuse the way I see fit. Low scores on an anthropology exam? Nope, didn't happen. Burnt the risotto on what was to be a romantic evening in? No, gone, never happened.
My one big concern is, if this is possible; taking a game off of metacritic, then what is to prevent any publisher from removing low scoring games and then marketing it as the best thing since sliced bread?
In this man's humble opinion, I don't think Sega should be allowed to remove those games from metacritic. Like Ben said, some people read trusted reviews then go to sites like metacritic to see the overall opinion of the game before making a purchase. This reeks of BS.
And by the actions they did resulted with the exact opposite of their intention. Smart.
He puts the Ostrich into Ostracized with this behaviour!
The damage has been done Sega; we all know the scars are there permanently.
I find their actions far worse than the existence of the poor rated Sonic titles on the site. Those that use reviews/ratings to help decide on purchasing a game will still find plenty of information on any game regardless of its inclusion on one little ole site.
What Sega has done is hurt their brand name far more than any rating on that site was hurting the Sonic name.
Agreed. Now instead of a company that has made some bad games, they're a company that has made some bad games and then tried to hide that fact from the consumer in essence lying to them to promote sells. I don't like to give money to companies that lie to me.
Down the memory hole!
This reminds me of Charile Christ.
i also heard that they'll stop selling the bad games too not just delist them
i guess they feel bad about about how much these games suck
Tbh, i dont see the point,
i will judge the game being released, not there past games, and if the new one looks good, i will buy it Simple.
Unless every game they have made is awful,
which for sega, isn't the case.
I never was a fan of Sonic but I did enjoy a Sonic game on my Genesis.
And the best thing about it?
The relaxing and sweet BGM, I still remember exactly how it sounded lik.
Want to buy a Sonic game, but concerned it will be bad? Worried that the score isn't on Metacritic? Don't worry! I've got my own little consumer's guide for Sonic games to help you distinguish the good from the bad.
If it was published after Sonic and Knuckles, it's a bad Sonic game.
Hope it helps!
(here's hoping Sonic 4 will prove the exception)
cannibalisatiom…huh??
Besides why would Metacritic even allow something like that?
Funny thing is they thought it would be better to not be sneaky about it and came up with these reasons.
They can do what they want. One of my most wanted games this gen, Sonic 4, is out next week and according to early reviews, it's the best Sonic since…..3! Got nothing but praise.
You're right they can, and we can point out how stupid and how much more it lowers Sega's credibility as a videogame developer.
"it's the best Sonic since…..3!"
You make it sound like that's an accomplishment.
They may be able to remove it but they can't stop word of mouth. Even the employees at Gamestop (at least the one near me) will tell you which games are legitimately sub-par.
Nice….it seems someone is learning from Microshaft's tactics…
Anyway, I always wanted to try a good Sonic game, someone can recommend one?? I downloaded the demo version of the game where Sonic transforms into a werewolf, is that game good??
Sorry guys. Wrong interpretation of the article…read the update.
Thanks for the update, still annoying practices on the part of Sega.
Yeah LV it is still annoying, but not as blatantly misleading as was originally thought.
I think it's better to stop selling the games than to refuse to acknowledge they did poorly in reviews.
hehe, well that changes everything. Thanks for the update.
Last edited by Ergi on 10/7/2010 3:03:28 PM
Not only have the past few sonic games sucked they're also responsible for some of the most horrible movie based videogames ever, so they might as well DE-list them too while their at it.
Last edited by GuyverLT on 10/7/2010 3:54:41 PM
Is SE gonna remove FFXIII?
Dude….
Too soon?
actually I have no clue what the metacritic score is, that just felt warranted. I mean if you wanted to make the series look better 😉
PS3 – 83
360 – 82
Not bad considering.
Here's the problem with Final Fantasy XIII. So all you, "oh the game is so wonderful, all you stuck up fans are just narrow-minded" can stuff it. Yeah it's, good. But look at this trend….
Metacritic scores:
Final Fantasy VI – 91
Final Fantasy VII – 92
Final Fantasy VIII – 89
Final Fantasy IX – 93
Final Fantasy X – 92
Final Fantasy XII – 92
Final Fantasy XIII – 83
See the problem? It's 10% WORSE than it's predecessors! It doesn't keep up with the pace.
Guess which 2 FF's may SHOCK you as better metacritic entries?
Final Fantasy X-2 – 85
Final Fantasy XI – 85
Yeah… even the online game and the sequel to FFX did better… and spin-offs like Crisis Core and Tactics scored better too!!!
So…. there.
Last edited by Underdog15 on 10/8/2010 10:42:16 AM
Thanks for the update. It makes a lot more sense now.
Sega please save sonic. The guy is part of a lot gamers childhoods. First game I ever owned.
Do any of you know Sonic is back on form?!
tis why i hate sega, still 5 years into this gen there STILL yet to release a half decent game!
ill be buying sonic 4 next week, but sega better prey its the best thing since sliced bread, because if its not i swear to god it will be my last sega game for life!
C'mon guys, it can't be that hard to tweak the site to automatically filter out these kind of postings?