MetaMetaCritic, the reviewer-review aggregator [April Fools]

Jordan Mallory
J. Mallory|04.01.12

Sponsored Links

Jordan Mallory
April 1, 2012 12:34 PM
MetaMetaCritic, the reviewer-review aggregator [April Fools]
Paradox Interactive's contribution to 2012's April Fools' Day festivities is MetaMetaCritic, a "new reviewer-review aggregator" that "aggregates reviews of reviewers." Its basically exactly what it sounds like, and while the site doesn't actually work, per se, it has been pre-loaded with several gaming journalists from around the internet, including our own Dave Hinkle.

"David remains difficult to control and displays terrible pathfinding," read's Dave's fictional review from faux-outlet EDIT Magazine. "Nevertheless he has an extraordinary ability to not only produce words, but frequently arrange them in the correct order, no mean feat in this day and age."

"Select media groups have already cited MetaMetaCritic scores as providing a good guideline for journalists' bonus pay," reads the site's press release, available after the break.

... Wait, we're supposed to be getting bonuses? I need to make some phone calls.
Show full PR text
Paradox Revolutionizes Games Journalism with MetaMetaCritic

New Reviewer-Review Aggregator Aggregates Reviews of Reviewers

NEW YORK - April 1, 2012 - Paradox Interactive today launched an all-new platform to objectively quantify the art of games journalism. The new site, MetaMetaCritic (, provides publishers, developers, and readers alike with a quick and easy way to understand the world's overall opinion of popular game journalists, with each writer receiving an aggregated score based on reader reviews of the reviewers. This new system will provide game-enthusiast enthusiasts with a better overall concept of these writers, and allow them to make easy read/browse/troll decisions before spending their hard-earned unique pageviews.

"MetaMetaCritic will provide a more accurate, balanced system for reviewer reviews," said Lars Larsson at Paradox Interactive. "In a landscape with so many diverse scales for rating games journalists, it's hard to get an idea who the best writers really are. We all have different criteria for what makes a good review. How do we measure value and re-read value? And some of us try to base our ratings on abstract concepts like tone, voice, or whether an article was 'finished' or not. I've seen a lot of reviews get criticized lately for releasing day-one counterpoints – and don't get me started on the ending of the Mass Effect 3 review." Larsson continued.

Select media groups have already cited MetaMetaCritic scores as providing a good guideline for journalists' bonus pay. The site is live now at
All products recommended by Engadget are selected by our editorial team, independent of our parent company. Some of our stories include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, we may earn an affiliate commission. All prices are correct at the time of publishing.
Popular on Engadget