How Diablo III Gave Metacritic a Giant Middle Finger

There aren’t very many publishers or developers who could get away with not sending out a single review copy of their hottest new title to the press, but it’s pretty clear that taking that approach with Diablo III isn’t hindering the sales success that Blizzard Entertainment is enjoying whatsoever. And it’s that revelation that’s prompted VG247 to crank out this editorial that examines why Diablo doesn’t need Metacritic to sell like hotcakes, and what other franchises could follow suit after the example that it set:

Diablo III may not be an indicator that publishers are about to make the move en bloc just yet. It’s impossible to deny that Blizzard has a rabid fanbase and is capable of selling in tens of millions of units no matter the scores. But this episode clearly shows that the notion of giving journalists pre-release code for certain games is irrelevant, and in many cases can be actively damaging. In this instance, then, Metacritic really doesn’t matter. It hasn’t affected sales, and no one was predicting some kind of creative disaster because Blizzard hadn’t set up some kind of pre-release review system.

I’d like to hope that companies like Microsoft, Sony, EA, Activision and the rest will be looking closely at how Blizzard released Diablo III, and genuinely, seriously starting to push back on Metacritic as a measure of success. The truth is that huge games don’t need launch reviews. The idea that someone can review a giant game with online play at a weekend event, or in a few days at home with offline public servers, is idiotic. By standing up to the perceived notion that there (has) to be a launch review, large publishers will do a service to consumers looking to make informed choices about games and remove opportunities for cynics to claim scores were bought.