EA boss on why reviews are frustrating

By Robert Purchese Published 18 June, 2008

Reckons Bad Company's worth at least 7.

EA boss John Riccitiello has said he will be upset if Battlefield: Bad Company gets less than 7/10 when it comes out later this month.

He feels the game, along with Mercenaries 2, Dead Space and Spore, are probably the best examples of EA titles that should rate highly this year.

"If I move to the games line-up, I am really proud of Mercenaries. I am really proud of Bad Company; I'd be disappointed if it was below high 70s. It is a really good game," said Riccitiello during a stock conference.

He also believes the EA Sports titles he's carefully looked at are better than their predecessors. Peter Moore will be happy.

But predicting scores is something Riccitiello finds frustrating, as a "certain cadre of journalists" would simply love to prove his guesstimates wrong.

Plus, Riccitiello is under the impression that the EA label has never been able to attract the cult "everybody-has-to-rate-it-one-hundred" following among critics that others have - presumably referring to things like BioShock, Metal Gear Solid 4 and so on.

The EA boss also questioned the number of videogames journalists there are knocking around these days, suggesting the old way of gathering 10 or so professional and trusted opinions may have been better.

"It used to be [that] all Metacritic [averages] were higher once upon a time because it was 10 professionals rating them," said Riccitiello. "Now, sort of anybody with a pen can rate them and it ends up with a bit of a wider track sometimes."

Battlefield: Bad Company is due out for PS3 and Xbox 360 on 27th June.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (48) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • asphaltcowboy #1 4 years ago

    Reckons Bad Company's worth a 7.

    That's some baiting right there! For a start he said high 70s (which would round up to 8, surely?) and if that's from Metacritic, I think he's suggesting that it deserves to have it's reviews scores spread over the 7-10 range?

  • Der_tolle_Emil #2 4 years ago

    Well the demo of Bad Company was certainly fun so I hope it's at least a 7/10 as well otherwise I might have to skip this because I already have more than enough games that I still need to play.

  • DFawkes #3 4 years ago

    The demos certainly pointing at a 7-8 for me, loving the destructability. Makes taking cover a bit riskier when that cover could become rubble :)

  • bionicbeagle #4 4 years ago

    It's cool to hate EA, innit!

  • alimokrane #5 4 years ago

    6/10

  • penhalion #6 4 years ago

    I think the key point in his statement was this

    Plus, Riccitiello is under the impression that the EA label has never been able to attract the cult "everybody-has-to-rate-it-one-hundred" following among critics that others have

    this implies (and I think we've all been seeing this first hand lately) that there are certain games that critics seem to have agreed to rate at 10/10 or 100% regardless of the actual quality or whether they even deserved it in the first place. Reading between the lines it seems as though EA haven't been playing that game of bribe the critic that we know the likes of take 2 indulge in. By bribe I mean dangling embargos for those who rate the game less than perfect and early review allowances etc. etc. to whoever rates the game a 10/10.

  • groovychainsaw #7 4 years ago

    Having messed wit hcreature creator, spore's got a chance. Played the battlefield:bad company demo and there was no crouch or way of taking any sort of cover really, meaning i ran at a tank with a machine gun that ran out of ammo too quickly and then died so 5/10 from me ;-)

  • neilka #8 4 years ago

    Riccitiellol

  • Xerx3s #9 4 years ago

    Bwahaha, comedy gold!

  • onyxbox #10 4 years ago

    played the demo... seemed pretty good. Nice controls... smooth... good graphics.

  • Xerx3s #11 4 years ago

    "It's cool to hate EA, innit! "

    Dunno about that but I can most certainly feel no love for a company that willingly destroys the likes of westwood, origin, bullfrogs, etc.

  • Shrui #12 4 years ago

    By trusted i think he means "10 or so reviewers we could fly somewhere nice, get them drunk or flat out promise the ONLY exclusive to and they play nice".

    I don't trust anyone who gets paid to rate a product. Where there is money, advertising revenue and PR jollies the system is open to abuse (even if its unintentional). I also can spot a fanboy review a mile off as well (when a clearly average title seems to get 90-100%). So I will only buy on the advice of multiple reviews of different sources and on demos/gameplay footage together. This hobby is too expensive and my time for it shorter than it used to be for me to do otherwise.

  • krudster #13 4 years ago

    /is reviewing Bad Company.

    /has no issue with EA games.

  • asphaltcowboy #14 4 years ago

    "Played the battlefield:bad company demo and there was no crouch"

    Ok, are you sure you played it?

  • DrDamn #15 4 years ago

    @groovychainsaw
    There is a perfectly good crouch - just no prone - and why would you take on a tank with a machine gun in the first place?

  • mikew1985 #16 4 years ago

    They've pumped out some high quality stuff over the last year.

    There is no denying this, i'm not going listing all the titles again but i know there are other sensible people on EG who agree with this. EA are on an upward trend at the moment and this guy seems to be a driving force behind it. Having said that we'll have to see how they continue over the next 2-3 years.

  • menage #17 4 years ago

    MGS4, Bioshock, hell even Halo and such are all of the Star Wars epic scale pulp sci fi/fantasy fiction kind. The area of the fanboy so to speak. EA has never really dabbled in that area so "OMG it's a 9 kill them" reactions are not really suitable for their line-up.

    Only thing that comes close is C&C.

  • Bleh #18 4 years ago

    If they make there games better before releasing them (less patches) the games could get in my opinion a higher score.
    Mostly they already have a patch in store before the games even hit the shells and after a couple of patches the game gets a bit better playable. But why make a game good playable if you already have cashed in so lets make more expansion insteed.

    I'm more caution these days when there is a EA label on a game. It should get at least a 9 before considering buying it. But what can we do it's all about making money these days.

  • wewillselfdestruct #19 4 years ago

    mikew1985 speaks the truth. Anybody who's been paying any attention to EA since Riccitiello took over must be able to see that things have improved and are continuing to improve. Maybe they're not quite ready to start turning out 10/10 games yet, but things seem a lot more positive than they were under the previous regime.

  • jonsaan #20 4 years ago

    There was a time when most EA games got a 10 actually. BF. Before Fifa.

  • JohnnyWashnGo #21 4 years ago

    'it was 10 professionals rating them'

    Professional what?

    Playing games and giving an opinion doesn't require any formal qualifications whatsoever.
    Sure it helps if you can write, spell and form a sentence but that doesn't change a shite game into a good one.

    Personally, I am very happy to have as many unprofessional people as possible writing reviews.
    The chances are that they have actually played the friggin game and not had they review written for them by marketing idiots.

    God EA really do suck and haven't got a clue about gaming.

  • escapedape #22 4 years ago

    Boom Blox anyone? Awesome game, rewarded with awesome scores.

    And does anyone else find it odd that they seem to be aiming for a 7, rather than higher?

  • Skywise #23 4 years ago

    Meh so many reviewers makes bribery impossible!

  • Greychapter #24 4 years ago

    Usually I'm one to defend EA Sports titles as they deliver a reliable and enjoyable sporting experience, but the latest video of Tiger Woods 09 looks like a total cop out. If this is the first feature they are revealing then it doesn't say alot about the rest of the game.

    http://ww w.eurogamer.net/tv_video.php?pl...

  • Moz #25 4 years ago

    Well B:BC got a 93 from Game Informer according to metacritic so it's off to a good start. Let's see if other reviewers agree

    I execpt a Halo3 GTA4 counter weight 6/10 from EG

  • muscleblade #26 4 years ago

    It got 7/10 in Norwegian Gamereactor.

    Pros:
    Good singleplayer story and charachters
    Destructable environments
    Cons:
    Health system
    No death penalty

  • butler` #27 4 years ago

    He's so full of shit - regardless of what he thinks of Metacritic's choice of outlets.

    This elusive "10 professional journalists" he describes are usually the ones with the lowest scores i.e. Edge, Eurogamer, GameSpot (yeah I went there).

  • LukeFX #28 4 years ago

    I can see his point, Battlefield is a fucking ace game yet I can see people giving it shit reviews simply because its EA.

    People love to hate EA and the disappointing thing is that they kinda deserve it, it will take a fair few decent titles for the love to start happening.

    /me sexes EA :o

  • tobsen #29 4 years ago

    If even the game publisher himself would be satisfied with a 7 for his game, that's not exactly a good sign...

  • Vice.Destroyer #30 4 years ago

    Eurogamer aren't professional.

    @PatAU
    Before I am even finished with typing this post, I know that I shouldn't bother, that I am not going to get an intelligent response, but I just can't help myself. Why are you here, contributing in a forum which you think is unprofessional. Quite seriously, don't you feel a little strange making this place a lot more unprofessional?

  • spongebob #31 4 years ago

    Hah. Bullshit. Most of the sites rate games way too high still. It's good to see critical game critics.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #32 4 years ago

    Why are you here, contributing in a forum which you think is unprofessional.

    It's hardly unusual. Plenty of people frequent web sites that even have 'amateur' in their URL!

  • dsmx #33 4 years ago

    What was the last game EA released that even remotely deserved an 9 or 10. I can't think of one off the top of my head so it must of been a long time a go.

  • DrDamn #34 4 years ago

    @dsmx
    Fight Night 03 would get a 9 in my book, I'd also give BF2MC a 9 - that's more personal taste though I spent days playing that online. In isolation some of the Fifa's - but then they are often brought down by the fact they release an iteration a year + one per big championship - overkill. Oh and Boom Blox got 9/10 on this very site just over a month ago.

  • PlugMonkey #35 4 years ago

    presumably referring to things like BioShock, Metal Gear Solid 4 and so on.

    No, I think he's referring to things like GTA4. And reviewers like EuroGamer. But I'm only guessing. ;)

    What was the last game EA released that even remotely deserved an 9 or 10. I can't think of one off the top of my head so it must of been a long time a go.

    What DrDamn said, plus Burnout Paradise and Skate. And C+C3 would be pretty damn close too.

    So, quite a few if you're not burying your head in the "I hate EA even though I can't really remember why" sand.

  • BobsYourUncle #36 4 years ago

    CnC 3, a 9? O_o

  • polaris70 #37 4 years ago

    To be honest I don't care what the reviews say. After playing the multiplayer demo for Bad Company after 2 hours playing I wasn't buying the game, after 1 day playing it I'm definately buying the game. In this game you can't go off on your own and expect to live, you don't have that option unlike COD4 (and I love COD4) where you can run and gun if you want. You have to stick to your team mates or get inside an armoured vehicle and you have to co-ordinate to take or defend the objectives. Also if a wall in a house is blocking your path to an objective just blast a hole in the wall, problem solved and it also opens up some good strategy play.
    The sight of 3 main battle tanks, a couple of humvees and a chopper can be awesome if they are working together (the more experienced other players get the more you see this working together, it can be awesome to just sit back and watch). The more I play it the more enjoyable it is, for me anyway.

  • DrDamn #38 4 years ago

    @Polaris70
    Agree with you there. I was initially very disappointed with the BFBC demo but it's really growing on me now. I found the sensitivity needs to be turned down very low for me to feel comfortable with the controls. Once I'd done that and got used to the online level I found it tonnes of fun.

  • Freek #39 4 years ago

    Bioware is part of EA now, he'll get his high marks, he just needs to be patient.

  • The-Bodybuilder #40 4 years ago

    That's because EA haven't really gone for any epic, AAA, blockbuster titles. Sure they'll make a game for a AAA blockbuster movie, but not a game. Still, it's hard to do so with just 12 months dev time.

    But even I must admit that under this guy, EA has changed. They've aquired some good talens without micromanaging them to death (although I still hate that they've acquired bioware), they've been more adventerous (Burnout:p), they've yet to cash in on FN:3 (rather, spending more time to develop the next boxing game), they've actually backed away from cashing in on movies-to-games tie ins (and left it all for SEGA to whore) and have made some new and interesting IP.

    Face it, EA are on the up. Let's see how long it lasts for before greed fills thier loins.

  • Sir_TimAlot #41 4 years ago

    @ dsmx

    SKATE.... may not be everyones cup o' tea, but highly innovative, great visuals, very well designed and very good fun, in fact pretty sure eurogamer gave it a 9.

  • bonker #42 4 years ago

    Well, IMO, you can't do 'generic' (i.e. 99% of games) and not expect to max out at 7-8 anyway.

    And noone does 'generic' better & more often than EA ...

    They killed a ton of genuinely creative dev studios - the guys who are more likely to get 10s (or less than 5!) - so they could make more cash without competition and by doing less.

    So, lap it up you EA c*nts. You're rich but noone respects you because of what you do, what you have done and the fact that you make 99% of your money from marketing rather than creating an innovative quality product.

    Live with it ...

  • Mudo #43 4 years ago

    If I'm honest, if I made games I would find a lot of the reviews extremely irritating. Not referring to Eurogamer here (afterall, I do visit this site extremely often) but if you check a dozen reviews for any one game on Metacritic and just look at how poorly they're written and look at the kinds of things games are rated down or up for... it defies belief.
    It's no surprise really that a lot of game developers seem to have a gameplay-features checklist they need to check off, including the likes of bolted on multiplayer/coop/current pointless fad which is the difference between 60 and 80 on metacritic regardless of game quality.

    But I'm not a developer right now so I'll simply say "alas!" and move on

  • kangarootoo #44 4 years ago

    @Xerx3s

    "no love for a company that willingly destroys the likes of westwood, origin, bullfrogs, etc."

    There was a time when I might agree on that specific point, but surely a time comes where its reasonable to just say "get over it". I mean, we are talking about nearly 10 years ago here aren't we?

    @PatAU

    Whay are you here? If you don't like the site, and yet come here, what does that say about your sense of self worth. EG complete you, it would seem.

  • suicida #45 4 years ago

    "Hugely hyped game, multiplatform: 9 or 10 - followed up by comparison to fuel fanboy wars
    Hugely hyped platform exclusive: 8 or lower - conveniently gets lots of attention, hits and ad revenue from enraged fans
    Any other game no-one cares about: 7 or less as it's a nice, non-offensive score noone cares about. "

    And EG never back up those scores with 3 pages of text that explain why they've given a particular score do they.

    Oh, wait...

  • timberwolf #46 4 years ago

    i played the demo f**king s**t 6/10 generously

  • Feanor #47 4 years ago

    "Hugely hyped platform exclusive: 8 or lower - conveniently gets lots of attention, hits and ad revenue from enraged fans"

    Bioshock got a 10, so stfu.

  • keith123 #48 4 years ago

    They make so many games I'd like them to start getting some better reviews by making abetter game.

    Typical EA Game:
    Francised
    Flashy Presentation
    Poor Physics
    Poor Controls
    Some rushed to meet deadlines
    Not much enjoyment unless your a 6 year old

    Played new Battlefield demo, didn't really like it compared to COD4 so wont bother buying it.
    I really hope they don't buy Take Two, or if they do buy them they leave them as a separate entity with same staff and learn some stuff from them.

    "They killed a ton of genuinely creative dev studios - the guys who are more likely to get 10s (or less than 5!) - so they could make more cash without competition and by doing less.
    So, lap it up you EA c*nts. You're rich but noone respects you because of what you do, what you have done and the fact that you make 99% of your money from marketing rather than creating an innovative quality product.
    Live with it ..."

    +1
    Edited by 1 at 20/06/08 @ 20:31