知名遊戲製作人、《奧日》系列主創、《惡意不息》遊戲總監Thomas Mahler，全新推出遊戲評分聚合平台VideoGamesCritic。該平台主打玩家體驗優先，重構遊戲評分規則，旨在改變專業媒體主導評測話語權的行業現狀，讓普通玩家的真實評價成為評分核心依據。
該平台自稱為玩家最可信的評測來源，採用差異化權重評分機制。網站最終評分由兩部分構成，Steam玩家評價占比高達三分之二，專業媒體評分僅占三分之一。平台從OpenCritic抓取權威媒體評分，同時通過專屬「信任加權」算法優化Steam用戶評價數據，整合生成客觀綜合得分。
除創新評分規則外，平台還具備獨特的校驗功能。通過對比媒體評分與大眾玩家評分的偏差值，網站可直觀判定各家遊戲評測媒體評分的正誤與客觀性，有效篩選片面、失真的評測內容，為玩家選購遊戲提供更真實、可靠的參考依據。
Thomas Mahler表示，傳統評分平台過度側重媒體視角，無法真實反映普通玩家的遊玩體驗。新平台保留媒體評分的參考價值，但杜絕媒體評價凌駕於付費玩家體驗之上。同時平台優化評分時效性，優先參考Steam近期評論，解決了Metascore等平台評分固化、無法體現遊戲長期疊代優化的弊端。
Hey folks, I'm launching a website today: http://videogamescritic.com 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 growing, and at some point I realized it had become genuinely useful for any gamer, not just me. So here it is, for everyone. My main problem with the existing aggregators: Their scores tell you how the press felt about a game, not how players did. That made sense 20 years ago. I cared a lot what GameSpot gave a game back then. But today we can actually measure how players felt, and to me that will always matter more than how the press did. On http://videogamescritic.com, players hold at least two-thirds of every score, by rule. Press still counts, it just can't outvote the people who bought the game. The other big problem: Those sites rate a game once, at launch, and then never really touch it again. But that's not how games work anymore. A game can launch rough and get patched shortly after, but on Metacritic and OpenCritic it carries that scarlet letter forever. No Man's Sky is the obvious example: Famously rocky launch, and Hello Games has spent the years since relentlessly improving it. Its Metacritic score has never moved. On http://videogamescritic.com it launched at 50 and sits at 82 today, because scores here are LIVE: launch-era reviews fade out over time, and reviews written after a significant patch count the most. When player sentiment changes, the number changes. Simple. And since press does still count, I ended up reviewing the reviewers too. Every outlet and creator gets a trust score based on one question: When they reviewed a game, did players end up agreeing? You can see who consistently calls games the way players see them, and who doesn't. Again, simple and fair. And everything is transparent. Every game page shows exactly how its score was computed, and the full methodology is public. No editorial opinion, no magic number. Anyway, I hope you get a kick out of it! Even just as a way to see the best games on each platform, find something you missed, or browse a site that isn't wallpapered in ads, I think it's already pretty useful. Enjoy!👍❤️ https://twitter.com/thomasmahler/status/2095125044577829134
新舊評分體系的差異在實際案例中十分突出，《黎明行者之血》Metacritic媒體評分達83分，而側重玩家體驗的VideoGamesCritic僅給出69分，清晰印證了全新評分體系更貼合大眾玩家的真實遊玩感受。
