A new study of Metacritic data suggests that Ubisoft, aka the Activision of Europe, is the least consistent publisher when it comes to game quality, coming bottom of the pile, while Rockstar triumphed as the best.
The study assigned points values to different Metacritic scoring brackets. Those games avering 90-100 review scores received 2 points, while games with a Metacritic score of 80-89 got 1 point. 70-79 received no points, 60-69 got -1 point and anything under that got -2 points. Not exactly rocket science, and I hate this idea that games rated in the seventies receive nothing (since it's a good score as far as I'm concerned), but you can get a general idea of how each publisher fares.
Rockstar was branded the most consistent publisher with 19 points over 23 titles. By incredibly stark contrast, Ubisoft's 237 games dragged the publisher down to a score of -148. Unsurprisingly, Activision didn't do a lot better, with a shameful -138 points. Looking at this, I don't know if "least consistent" is an accurate description, however. It seems Ubisoft and Activision are consistently crap.
Of course, Ubisoft and Activision make a lot of money despite churning out garbage, so this is hardly going to make them weep with shame. However, this study has merit simply because I get a chance to insult Ubisoft and Activision along with the bargain-bucket, exploitative trash that they dare to call "videogames." That, my friends, is worth more than any Metacritic score.