Somewhat surprisingly, Electronic Arts (EA) has topped review charts this year. This is despite being voted “Worst Company in America” by gamers fed-up with day-one DLC and micro-transactions that are popping up in every one of the publisher’s releases.

Though it may be hard to remember due to the scandals over its ending and day-one DLC, Mass Effect 3 was well-reviewed upon release and tops EA’s list of 2012 games with a Metacritic score of 93. The publisher’s average score was 75.2, and none of its games scored a 49 or lower.

The next three publishers on the list are all first-party publishers: Microsoft with a 73, Sony with a 72.3, and Nintendo with a 71.2. Microsoft was led by Mark of the Ninja‘s 91, but was balanced out by poorly rated Kinect and Xbox LIVE Arcade games. Nintendo was similarly balanced by casual-gamer targeted titles, though Xenoblade Chronicles‘ 92 saved it from falling lower on the list. Similar to EA, Sony also did not have any scores fall below 50, though a majority of its titles fell into the “average” range from 50 to 75.

Capcom (70.4), Warner Bros (70.6), Ubisoft (68.2), Konami (69), Sega (69.9), and Activision Blizzard (64.4) rounded out the top ten. Activision’s highest-rated title was Diablo III (88), but the publisher was brought low by movie tie-in games such as 007 Legends, which managed a 25 Metacritic score.

As for the “mid-size” publisher (those that released between 7 and 14 titles) rankings, Take-Two Interactive (83.1), Telltale Games (83.9), and Square Enix (75.2) led the list. Telltale Games was buoyed by each episode of its The Walking Dead adventure game, which managed to win quite a few game of the year awards.

The latest numbers in regards to Android distribution shows that Android 2.3.3 (Gingerbread) is still the most popular version of the OS with 63.6 percent of the market. Most consumers are still on their two-year contract with their current phone (like me) and our carriers/device manufacturers refuse to move us to Ice Cream Sandwich.

That being said, there are a few carriers/OEMs who are pushing out Ice Cream Sandwich to various devices. Couple with that the explosive growth of Android and you have ICS moving on up through the ranks. The latest numbers show the latest version of ICS as having 10.7 percent of the market. It’s the third largest section of the Android market after Android 2.2 (Froyo) at 17.3 percent.

With Jelly Bean coming out in the middle of July, it will be interesting to see the adoption at that point. The only devices that are getting Jelly Bean out of the gate are the Nexus 7 and Galaxy Nexus. Unfortunately, the Galaxy Nexus has been banned in the U.S. thanks to the efforts of all the seeing eye of Sauron Apple, so that leaves the Nexus 7 to carry the weight of bringing Jelly Bean into the world of rankings.

It’s also important to note that many carriers have delayed or won’t be delivering ICS to devices until later this year. The majority of people on Android 2.3-powered handsets will be able to get their hands on ICS at some point which should help drive ICS adoption up. It will still be a while, however, until Gingerbread is dethroned from the top spot.

The rest of the data includes interesting stats on the relative rise over time of various Android operating systems and a breakdown of screen sizes. It would appear that most Android devices (57.5 percent) are equipped with a normal hdpi screen.

The increased adoption of ICS is only a good thing for Google and Android OEMs around the world. The sooner they can get everybody on board with ICS, the sooner Android can evolve to the next level. Google might also want to slow down on the new versions until everybody can catch up.

Whether or not Viacom’s recent partnership with Amazon Prime will affect the media company’s rankings in the future remains to be seen.

As certainly as people are going to watch tons of online video (1,355 minutes per viewer, in fact), so then will advertisements continue to stalk the people. Granted, that’s what makes so much of the video content viewable for free, but it’s still a nag when you see the numbers laid before you like this. In January, Americans watched nearly 39 ads a piece in order to enjoy their online videos, which in the context of an hour of network television probably isn’t much more than what anybody is used to. Americans did somehow manage to watch a lot less of those ads, though: 5.5 million ads for January, down from 7.2 ads in December. Hulu remained the biggest ad pusher in January with 1.5 billion video ads viewed.

On YouTube, VEVO continues to be the page to go to among the site’s partner channels. The channel boasted 50.6 million viewers in January, dwarfing the second-closest partner channel, Warner Music, which attracted 29.7 million viewers.

One last fun fact: almost 85% of online Americans watched some kind of online video. That’s a lotta “Sh*t _____ says” memes you’ve been making (and watching), America.

In December, Microsoft’s Bing unseated Yahoo! to become the #2 rank among search engines and in January Bing cemented that second rank a little further. The percentage of shares among all search engines remained largely unchanged in January from December, which if you’re Microsoft is probably good news. Consistency like that demonstrates that Bing’s bump to the second most-used search engine in December wasn’t just a fluke. Also, any argument about how the holidays inflated Microsoft’s market share in December’s would appear to be largely unfounded.

Given Yahoo’s recent top-level shake-ups, it’ll be curious to see if the percentage shares of the search market change much for the company in February.

Lastly, yes, Google remained Boss Hogg of the trough search engines.

According to ByteLevel, the “report card” analyzes each website based on the following criteria: Global reach, global navigation, global/mobile architecture and localization/sociality. Apparently Google fit those criteria just a little bit better than Facebook.

When asked “what is the value of comparing companies across different industries”, they say:

By keeping a broad focus on all major industries, we are able to point executives to those companies and industries that are doing the best job of presenting themselves to the world. Every company included does have peers by which it can be evaluated. In the end, our goal is to provide a truly global perspective on which companies and industries are the most active and successful in web globalization. Only through casting a wide net do we achieve this goal. 

Some other companies involved in the report include: Adidas, Amazon, Disney, BMW, Sony, Starbucks, Pepsi, Visa and several more as well.

Some notable rankings include: Nikon in 13th place, Microsoft takes 19th place and Yahoo! comes in 24th.

If it’s any consolation to Facebook, they obliterated all other social networks and blogs this year. Blogger, Google’s blogging service, was a distant second to Facebook’s top-ranked social networking site with 45.7 unique visitors per month. Twitter trailed even further behind the two online services with 23.5 million unique visitors followed by another blogging service, WordPress.com, at 20.3 million unique visitors. One telling detail of this data about social networks is that Myspace.com – Myspace! – was the fifth top ranked social network/blog in 2011 with 17.9 million visitors – over twice as many unique visitors as Google+. Really, Google+, you couldn’t even keep up with Myspace? While Google may be the top web brand in the country this year, they’ve still got some distance to cover in the social networking arena.

Also, there’s this report from CNET earlier today that says that Google+ surpassed 62 million users. Something isn’t adding up. Granted, the CNET report says that a quarter of all Google+ users joined in December and the Nielsen data doesn’t include December, but that’s still a huge discrepancy in these numbers. Maybe Google’s fudging their numbers by synchronizing Google+ with Gmail accounts so that they can include Gmail users as Google+ stats. I mean, I technically am a Google+ user because I use Gmail but that doesn’t mean I actually use Google+ for anything. I don’t see how else these numbers can be so starkly different.

Google shouldn’t hold its gigantic G-shaped head too low, though, because they also dominated among online video providers this year. YouTube, Google’s video service, attracted 111.1 million unique visitors this past year. The closest any other video service came to that number was VEVO, who attracted 34.5 million viewers. One notable stat in this data set is that Netflix took the Elevator of Winning all the way down to the Basement of Losing because they eked into the last spot on this list with 7.4 million. They’re probably lucky they even showed up on this list after spending their totally fubar summer trying their very best not to admit to everyone, “Hey, look okay, we have no idea what we’re doing!” Given that the DVD and streaming service is now split and nobody really wants to pay twice as much for both services now, I bet Netflix doesn’t even show up on this list next year.

It’s probably a moot question to ask at this point, but is anyone even surprised by these rankings? When was the last time anyone even logged into a Myspace account? Watch this space this time next year to find out what 2012 does to shake up the hierarchy of online media titans.

Webmasters and SEO gurus have been scratching our heads for a few weeks now trying to figure out what has been happening to Google’s SERP rankings. After scouring blogs and forums for the last few days, it would seem that there is no real consensus. In fact, it seems that no one is willing to even speculate much as to what is happening. To date there has not been any official word from Google. We all know that Google does not announce their algorithm updates, much to the chagrin of webmasters everywhere.

The buzz recently on several blogs and from our own data demonstrates significant changes in PageRank and wild fluctuations in websites SERP. The last big news we did hear from Google was the June 16th 2009 announcement from Matt Cutts blog on PageRank sculpting where he discussed changes to how Google treats link juice when there are nofollow links. But that’s another blog topic altogether so if you like you can read the full post here: http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/pagerank-sculpting/ so it may be that the nofollow·attribute has been rendered useless for sculpting PageRank. But then, PR sculpting was never really the intended function behind nofollow; it was merely convenient side effect.

All that Google employee, John Mu cared to say when answering a customer’s inquiry as to why his site had suddenly dropped in PR with no apparent cause was:

"Hi Radoslav

You have a nice-looking site . As far as I can tell, it looks like the change in Toolbar PageRank for your site is only due to some technical quirk and not something that you need to worry about.

Cheers

John"

Barry Schwartz (AKA "Rustybrick") then pointedly asks:

"John, is the PR ‘Technical Quirk’ somewhat widespread?"

There was no further reply from Google. The post is available here:

http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=0fb59587d973cc8a&hl=en

Unfortunately, when person’s website goes south in rankings for no apparent reason, people do notice and do worry about it. So unless Google opens up a bit we are left scratching our heads as usual, trying to figure out what is going on.

The following thread gives another vote to the possibility that Google is replacing PageRank value with site trust and/or domain authority: http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/020335.html. This is also one of many threads where users are expressing frustration and beginning to consider trying the new alternative to Google, Bing. Watch your back Google.

There have been some major experiments this year form Google that were relatively short lived and those are fine. We all expect to see the occasional wild results for a weekend every few months along with quarterly PageRank updates. The June PR update was enough of a surprise coming so close on the heels of an update late in May: http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/020273.html. The update itself is not too shocking. What is interesting is that this is happening so soon after Google’s last update and the fact that garbage results and rapid ranking changes have been coming steadily for weeks now. It’s about time Google lets things settle down before more people get the bright idea to give Bing a try.

Here are some direct comments from the forum members at webmasterworld.com:

http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/3943981-4-30.htm

"It has been my observation "followgreg" (a username) when the SERP’s get like what you describe above this is what [Google] wants to happen so the Review team and Matt’s team can put the necessary data in place that will deal with what your describing. It is easier to review a site when they are on page 1 verses page 200 and [Google] knows what filters were relaxed that would allow for the "New" 1st page ranking to pop up. I myself don’t see the polluted SERP’s as your describing but then again I am not in every sector and can only look at the nitches I am working under."

http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/3943981-2-30.htm

"and right now it looks like all sets of the results include some trivial and penalized and junk .edu pages rising into the top 50, along with some long-neglected good ones. This used to happen all the time with updates — shuffle things up, the poop rises, then it gets flushed, and things settle down. we haven’t had an update in that format in a long time, but it seems clear we are in the middle of whatever is changing and not the end."

We can analyze the SERP’s, collect all the data we can find, and listen to all of the "buzz" we like, but at the end of the day we are still at the mercy of the "Big G". It is not unusual for Google to conduct their more aggressive algorithm changes at this time of year but it is unusual to see so much experimentation so close together taking so long. With there being no official word coming from Google it’s hard to do more than speculate on the changes that we can observe. We all certainly hope that things stabilize soon and we’ll continue monitoring changes in the rankings.

But until Google decides to straighten things out can anyone say "Pay-per-click"? I knew you could…

So how does the widely varied public opinion on the matter line up with search results?

I am willing to make an educated guess that Google is experimenting with website trust and authority in their algorithm (and perhaps plenty more) however as complaints from the forums echo Googles search results seem to be rather bi-polar these last few weeks.

We have well established sites being outranked by new sites, and by sites with very few backlinks. Also by sites using black hat techniques and unfortunately we see some established and often very trustworthy white hat websites simply dissappearing from the rankings altogether. At the same time we have literally day old Craigslist posts ranking in the top results. Some .edu and .gov sites have flown to the top while others have plummetted.

How often do you see day old pages rank near the top for competitive search terms? If "trust" has that much of an affect on a new pages rankings it’s likely that "trusted" sites will dominate the rankings with every new page of content flooding out the competition and reducing their ability to gain trust. I hope the minds at Google have their sober thinking caps on and not their beer hats. But so far there seems to be little consistant rhyme or reason since we have some trusted sites dissappearing and others dominating in the SERP’s.

Luckily we had some old SERP analysis notes from June where we had a close look at one of our clients top 5 competitors for their targeted search term on Google. We decided to compare each against the current search results since Google’s latest "technical quirk". Here’s the rundown according to Yahoo’s api and our analysis:

Former #1 website – PR 4 landing page, PR 5 root domain.
1700+ external inbound links, 800+ internal backlinks.
Almost one thousand of these backlinks are from a handful of what appear to be partner sites. A significant amount are from various blogs.
Strong root domain with almost 5k external inbound links.
Now ranking at #2

Former #2 website – PR 6 landing page, PR 7 root domain.
Less than 100 external inbound links, over 15k internal backlinks.
Root domain has 140k+ external inbound links and 16k+ internal backlinks.
Very strong root domain and what should be a high trust name. Much of the pages ranking comes from the internal backlinks from the root domain and other pages on the site.
Now ranking at #5

Former #3 website – PR 4 landing page, PR 7 root domain.
5k+ external inbound links, less than 100 internal backlinks.
Root domain has 130k+ external inbound links and 16k+ internal backlinks.
Not only is this an extremely strong domain its brand is a household name across North America and not only would I trust this site based on its name and reputation but I would say the incoming links are as organic as they come.
Strangely this website no longer ranks anywhere in the top 300 results.

Former #4 website – PR 4 root domain
1k+ external inbound links, 500+ internal backlinks.
Most external links are from articles, blogs, and directories.
Now ranking at #6

Former #5 website – PR 4 root domain
6k+ external inbound links, 400+ internal backlinks.
Many backlinks are from PR7 and PR8 blogs, hundreds from one PR5 blog in particular. The website is referenced and backlinked on some government websites as well.
No longer ranks anywhere in the top 300 results.

New #1 website – PR 6 landing page, PR 9 root domain, .gov site
700+ external inbound links, only several internal backlinks.
Root domain has 430k+ external inbound links and almost 630k internal backlinks.

New #3 website – PR 4 landing page, PR 5 root domain
Less than 100 external inbound links, 40 internal backlinks.
Root domain has less than 300 external inbound links and less than 150 internal backlinks
Despite the small number of links this site has come from nowhere. While it is a widely known brand name and should have some trust attached to that, it is strange to see it taking the place of an even larger household name which had approximately 1300 times more external inbound links.

New #4 website – PR 5 landing page, PR 8 root domain.
Less than 200 external inbound links, 200+ internal backlinks.
Root domain 3.7+ million external inbound links, 3k+ internal backlinks
It’s a wiki page and therefore is a highly trusted authority most likely according to Google. I believe it was ranking at #10 in our previous analysis.

The results show a polarized contradiction of trusted sites being brought to the top and others being shot to the bottom while sites with minimal links and reputation seem to be beating out well established competitors for their rankings. Black hat sites are seeing the same polarized change as the trusted sites with some jumping to the top and others being sent to Google’s version of Davy Jones locker.

And on that note I have to ask the same question I asked during Pirates of the Carribean III At Worlds End… "When will this end?" And when will our plunder be kindly returned from "Davy Google Jones Jr’s Locker"?

Here are the 7 Proven Ways to get Your Website on Page 1 Organically & then Convert as stated by the presenter Shawn Moore.

1. Content is King
   What your content says, what your images and video show not only give users a first impression, but those items are also important to how a search engine is going to interpret your website.
2. Navigation and Architecture
   Looking into the way that your menus and internal linking structure are important. Can the web crawlers see and index your navigation? Or is it in JavaScript or Flash that may not be as search friendly?
3. Blogs
   Using a blog is just another way to generate more content for the search engines to index and use to rank your website.
4. Quality and Keyword Rich Inbound Links
   The number of links you have is important, but the quality of those links is more important. Get links from relevant sites and ensure that those links are using keyword phrases and not just your website address or business name.
5. Database
   Shawn said that choosing the right database for your site is important. Some are not search engine friendly and that choosing the wrong one will cause lots of issues down the line.
6. Electron Press Releases or Optimized Releases
   These releases give your site more exposure in search engines and the keyword rich links in the content can help increase your rankings.
7. Domain Name Strategy
   It was recommended that, if you can, choose a domain name with keyword phrases in it as it’ll give an added boost in search engines. You can also purchase additional domain names and forward them onto your website. Try thinking about what a user may type into the address bar of their browser and then register that domain for easy access.

Some of the tips are well known, others were a bit questionable to me. I’m still trying to figure out how a certain type of database can hurt a site as it’s all about how the content is displayed on that page and the URLs used that is the part to be concerned with.

Overall, the session was a good one for those just starting out in the industry.

Comments

While one rankings service lists Google nearing 70 percent of the US search market, another has them at a far less lofty level.

ComScore publisned their June rankings for the top five search engines today, with Google taking 61.8 percent of US searches. American searchers tapped out 11.5 billion “core searches” during the month, a 7 percent gain from May.

Yahoo drew 20.6 percent of June’s searches, down 0.3 percent from May. Microsoft pulled in 8.5 percent, also down from May by 0.7 percent.

Ask.com and AOL each gained enough to get 4.5 percent of the search market each.

Out of those 11.5 billion core searches in June, Google took 7 billion of them. Yahoo’s 2.4 billion and Microsoft’s 1 billion followed. Ask.com experienced a small increase to 501 million queries, but AOL fell from 486 million to 471 million queries.

Plenty of sound reasons exist for manually editing search results. Listings leading to sites containing viruses or malware, pages detailing illegal content like child exploitation, or simply content that someone, somewhere, wants removed on some kind of legal grounds, all face the prospect of being excised from Google’s index.

"In our view, the web is built by people," Amit Singhal said at the official Google blog, in his introduction to Google ranking. "You are the ones creating pages and linking to pages. We are using all this human contribution through our algorithms."

Don’t get excited, webmasters, Singhal isn’t shedding any sunlight on the black box of Google’s rankings. He shared more of a philosophical viewpoint, an interesting one given he’s worked on Google’s secret algorithm sauce since 2000.

Ahead of the "no manual intervention" position Google prefers to maintain for its rankings, Singhal said the company wants to serve the most relevant results it can to a given user, and to keep that deliver simple. "We make about ten ranking changes every week and simplicity is a big consideration in launching every change. Our engineers understand exactly why a page was ranked the way it was for a given query," he said.

A couple of reasons occur to Singhal in response to that "common – but misguided" question about manual intervention. First was the ‘people making links and pages’ concept mentioned previously. The second reason, well, sometimes a broken query means an opportunity to improve the algorithm again.

And again, and again, and again.

For our webmaster readers who value their rankings, it means there will always be some kind of changes taking place under the hood of Google’s ride. To echo Professor Moody from the Harry Potter books, ‘constant vigilance’ should be the webmaster’s credo. Blogoscoped.com discussed Google and manual edits two years ago, but the advice bears repeating today.