Metacritic's 12th annual game publisher rankings

[eastmen]

https://www.metacritic.com/pictures/2022-game-publisher-rankings/31

Metacritic's #1 Publisher of the Year. It is very rare for a publisher to average above 80 for its releases across a single calendar year. But how often does a company average above 85 ? Never ... until this year.

Our runaway winner of this year's Publisher of the Year honors, Microsoft certainly published fewer titles in 2021 than it does in a typical year. But what games it did publish were uniformly excellent, making Microsoft the only publisher with a 100% success rate. Three different titles scored 90 or higher (also tops among all publishers): the latest Forza Horizon racer, a sequel to Psychonauts, and the Xbox Series X version of Microsoft Flight Simulator. (Their successes almost make Halo Infinite seem like a disappointment with a mere 87.) Can Microsoft maintain its quality control once Activision Blizzard is welcomed into the fold? Stay tuned.

Sony comes in at Number 2

What is interesting is that Acitvision is Number 4. I was surprised that so many of their games get high ratings( I don't really play any of them.


Also Bethesda is ranked 5th.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Sony comes in at Number 2

Destruction All Stars dragged Sony way down. A game they gave away with PS+ one month and I've still never played. I don't quite understand the scoring here, (because position 5 is 80.2 average Metacritic and position 6 is higher at 80.6) but here is the top ten numerically challenged averaged metacritically-scored games by publisher:

1. Microsoft - 87.4
2. Sony - 81.3
3. Humble Games - 80.9
4. Activison-Blizzard - 80.6
5. Bethesda Softworks - 80.2 <- this, then..
6. Capcom - 80.6 <- huh?
7. Bandai Namco - 78.5
8. SEGA - 77.6
9. EA - 78.3
10. 505 Games - 75.7

 

[dobwal]

Destruction All Stars dragged Sony way down. A game they gave away with PS+ one month and I've still never played. I don't quite understand the scoring here, (because position 5 is 80.2 average Metacritic and position 6 is higher at 80.6) but here is the top ten numerically challenged averaged metacritically-scored games by publisher:

1. Microsoft - 87.4
2. Sony - 81.3
3. Humble Games - 80.9
4. Activison-Blizzard - 80.6
5. Bethesda Softworks - 80.2 <- this, then..
6. Capcom - 80.6 <- huh?
7. Bandai Namco - 78.5
8. SEGA - 77.6
9. EA - 78.3
10. 505 Games - 75.7

They are using some type of grading system that takes account of more than overall average. They may be taking account of the average for titles that fell into the "good" range of metacritic scoring.

 

[dobwal]

https://www.metacritic.com/pictures/2022-game-publisher-rankings/31



Sony comes in at Number 2

What is interesting is that Acitvision is Number 4. I was surprised that so many of their games get high ratings( I don't really play any of them.


Also Bethesda is ranked 5th.

So technically, MS accounts for three of the top five slots. I wonder how that will play itself out when all the companies begin to formally operate under MS.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

So technically, MS accounts for three of the top five slots. I wonder how that will play itself out when all the companies begin to formally operate under MS.

Noting what you said about a different scoring system being used for the actual rankings, lower scores for Bethesda And Activision-Blizzard will, on average, produce lower scores (and presumably lower whatever-numbers-they-are-using scores) will pull down the Microsoft scores.

That said, under the entry for Bethesda, Metacritic states: "Microsoft has pledged to maintain ZeniMax as a separate business, we are treating Bethesda as a separate publisher—for now". I'm guessing/assuming the reason for maintaining the acquired publisher was to see through publication of Deathloop and Ghostwire Tokyo on PlayStation. I'm not sure what the benefit there would be after having multiple publishing arms in the long term.

 

[iroboto]

Noting what you said about a different scoring system being used for the actual rankings, lower scores for Bethesda And Activision-Blizzard will, on average, produce lower scores (and presumably lower whatever-numbers-they-are-using scores) will pull down the Microsoft scores.

That said, under the entry for Bethesda, Metacritic states: "Microsoft has pledged to maintain ZeniMax as a separate business, we are treating Bethesda as a separate publisher—for now". I'm guessing/assuming the reason for maintaining the acquired publisher was to see through publication of Deathloop and Ghostwire Tokyo on PlayStation. I'm not sure what the benefit there would be after having multiple publishing arms in the long term.

agreed. Also, Perhaps they feel the name is still important for now; a few years of MS Bethesda until the games are synonymous with MS and they drop the Bethesda.

 

[eastmen]

So technically, MS accounts for three of the top five slots. I wonder how that will play itself out when all the companies begin to formally operate under MS.

Yea combining them would have them drop to 2nd or 3rd but It would still make them a high quality publisher. I think if activision goes through the MS has no Games thing is over

agreed. Also, Perhaps they feel the name is still important for now; a few years of MS Bethesda until the games are synonymous with MS and they drop the Bethesda.

I think Blizzard , Bethesda , ID are names that are big enough that they will continue to exist along side Microsoft Games.

 

[JPT]

I think Blizzard , Bethesda , ID are names that are big enough that they will continue to exist along side Microsoft Games.

That sounds wasteful, I mean there must be some overhead here that should be trimmed. No need for 4 complete orgs?!?
As a marketing Brand, maybe, but still its extra stuff. What does those names mean for most people?

 

[eastmen]

That sounds wasteful, I mean there must be some overhead here that should be trimmed. No need for 4 complete orgs?!?
As a marketing Brand, maybe, but still its extra stuff. What does those names mean for most people?

I'd imagine most things like HR and Marketing will stop existing for each of those companies and just be a part of Microsoft Games. But the actual teams working on games will stay as they are. Why buy something and remove the things that made it worth buying ? Do you think Microsoft is Disney? Just buy something and get rid of what makes it good ?

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I think Blizzard , Bethesda , ID are names that are big enough that they will continue to exist along side Microsoft Games.

As development teams absolutely, but as publishers? I doubt many people care who publishers games.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

It all boils down to whether the efficiency gained by dropping multi-publishing exceeds the loses in revenue by losing the branding. Over time I expect them to drop multi-publishing, especially if MS keeps winning Metacritic awards under their own name.

 

[BRiT]

"It is very rare for a publisher to average above 80 for its releases across a single calendar year. But how often does a company average above 85 ? Never ... until this year."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1502112905373884419

 

[Deleted member 11852]

It all boils down to whether the efficiency gained by dropping multi-publishing exceeds the loses in revenue by losing the branding. Over time I expect them to drop multi-publishing, especially if MS keeps winning Metacritic awards under their own name

Do you really think Microsoft would lose revenue due to changing the name under they publish id, Bethesda, Arkane, Activision-Blizzard or other games? Would people really not buy Elder Scrolls VI developed by Bethesda Studios just because it was published by Microsoft Studios? This seems very unlikely.

Who the hell cares who publishers any game. I honestly don't care if Vladimir Putin published Bethesda's Starfield, I'd still buy it.

 

[see colon]

It all boils down to whether the efficiency gained by dropping multi-publishing exceeds the loses in revenue by losing the branding. Over time I expect them to drop multi-publishing, especially if MS keeps winning Metacritic awards under their own name.

This assumes that Metacritic scores are that important to Microsoft, and if that's true, why wouldn't they keep another publisher at least in name to publish games they aren't sure will keep the 85+ score streak going?

 

[Deleted member 2197]

Top 20 GAME PUBLISHER RANKINGS BASED ON 2022 RELEASES (Top 45 Publishers detailed in link)

13th Annual Game Publisher Rankings - At a Glance

www.metacritic.com

GAME PUBLISHER RANKINGS BASED ON 2022 RELEASES

		Metascore	Good Games	Bad Games	Great Games
	Publisher	Avg.	Pts.	%	Pts.	%	Pts.	#	Pts.	Total Pts.
1	Sony	85.6	128.4	100%	100.0	0%	100.0	2	10.0	338.4
2	Paradox Interactive	81.8	122.7	100%	100.0	0%	100.0	0	0.0	322.7
3	Activision Blizzard	76.5	114.8	90%	90.0	0%	100.0	0	0.0	304.8
4	Focus Entertainment	80.0	120.0	79%	79.5	0%	100.0	1	5.0	304.5
5	Take-Two Interactive	78.9	118.3	86%	85.7	0%	100.0	0	0.0	304.0
6	Capcom	78.6	117.9	81%	81.3	0%	100.0	0	0.0	299.2
7	Sega	79.3	119.0	71%	70.6	0%	100.0	1	5.0	294.6
8	Annapurna Interactive	79.2	118.8	75%	75.0	0%	100.0	0	0.0	293.8
9	Humble Games	76.8	115.2	73%	72.7	0%	100.0	0	0.0	287.9
10	Devolver Digital	78.3	117.5	68%	68.0	0%	100.0	0	0.0	285.5
11	Red Art Games	74.9	112.4	70%	70.0	0%	100.0	0	0.0	282.4
12	Nintendo	78.6	117.9	63%	62.5	0%	100.0	0	0.0	280.4
13	Aksys Games	77.2	115.8	60%	60.0	0%	100.0	0	0.0	275.8
14	Atari	76.8	115.2	60%	60.0	0%	100.0	0	0.0	275.2
15	WayForward	73.8	110.6	63%	62.5	0%	100.0	0	0.0	273.1
16	Raw Fury	75.1	112.7	60%	60.0	0%	100.0	0	0.0	272.7
17	Electronic Arts	74.9	112.4	57%	57.1	0%	100.0	0	0.0	269.5
18	Digerati Distribution	75.0	112.4	56%	55.6	0%	100.0	0	0.0	268.0
19	Plug in Digital	72.1	108.2	55%	54.5	0%	100.0	0	0.0	262.8
20	Spike Chunsoft	74.2	111.3	50%	50.0	0%	100.0	0	0.0	261.3

Only publishers releasing at least 5 scored, distinct titles in 2022 are eligible. Points for average Metascore are awarded at 1.5 x the average (with a maximum of 150 points possible). Points for good % and bad % are awarded based on a maximum of 100 each. Points for "great" games are awarded as bonus points (5.0 points per unique title). To qualify as "great," a game must have a Metascore of at least 90 and have at least 7 critic reviews. iOS games are excluded. If a game has different publishers in different geographic regions, only the North American publisher is counted. But if a game's physical release has a different publisher than its digital release, the game counts toward both publishers' totals. Calculations are based on Metascores as of March 9, 2023.

 

[see colon]

Unless I'm missing something, Raw Fury only released 2 games in 2022. How they have a 60% bad games percentage is mathematically impossible, unless I'm misunderstanding that statistic. That number would be 4 games is you include current 2023 releases, which would again make a 60% impossible. It would also disqualify them from the rankings.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Unless I'm missing something, Raw Fury only released 2 games in 2022. How they have a 60% bad games percentage is mathematically impossible, unless I'm misunderstanding that statistic. That number would be 4 games is you include current 2023 releases, which would again make a 60% impossible. It would also disqualify them from the rankings.

Also, there's this disclaimer for making it onto the list.

Metacritic's 13th Annual Game Publisher Rankings

We reveal the past year's best and worst video game publishers (based on their 2022 releases) in the 13th edition of our annual Game Publisher Rankings.

www.metacritic.com

Only publishers with five or more distinct titles released last year are included in our rankings.

Which is why MS wasn't on there.

Rather unusually, a major game publisher (it rhymes with "Microsoft") that ranked #1 a year ago failed to reach that cutoff this time, leaving them unable to defend their title.

Regards,
SB

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Not enough games? MS need to get some more studios to be able to produce more content then...

Or I guess they could back independent content like other publishers

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Not enough games? MS need to get some more studios to be able to produce more content then...

Or I guess they could back independent content like other publishers

I'm guessing that with the increased financial freedom that the acquired companies have after acquisition that they are taking more time to put out new games. Some of the developers (like Double Fine) really need it as they habitually released buggy, unfinished but sometimes brilliant games. Psychonauts 2 was refreshingly relatively bug free for a Double Fine game, and I'd attribute that to Microsoft's influence.

And then some like InXile and Obsidian are working on significantly larger projects (or even multiple projects) than they have in the past. So, they are obviously going to take longer to release something after acquisition.

On top of that, if more of the acquired indie developers are working on more ambitious projects than they have done in the past, there is probably going to be some growing pains associated with that (management, project workflow, etc.).

Regards,
SB

 

[Johnny Awesome]

It was an off year for MS, for sure.