Admittedly I'm not wholly innocent as I may just look over a list of scores like on Metacritic or a review page, but if I want to actually investigate I've gotta read at least that closing paragraph. Anything else is only worth a "huh, so that got received pretty well/poorly" reaction before moving on.
How did reviews get so broken?
- Thread starter NotTheGuyYouKill
- Start date
Dual Blade
Member
This pretty much, I just straight up ignore the scores and judge the reviews on what's written and not what number has been given.
megabytecr
Member
Any type of score is completely broken, you have to read a review as for example with Wolfenstein TNO, what might be an issue for the reviewer might be great for you, like old school FPS designs (health, ammo, etc.)
Also, because there are games that have upped the expectations, does not mean that you will not enjoy a 7-7.5 game because it does not try anything new. Creativity and newness is having more impact than it should in game reviews.
Reviews should value more the fun factor, value/price than any other thing.
Also, because there are games that have upped the expectations, does not mean that you will not enjoy a 7-7.5 game because it does not try anything new. Creativity and newness is having more impact than it should in game reviews.
Reviews should value more the fun factor, value/price than any other thing.
Some Nobody
Junior Member
Is it?
Oh. Yeah I guess that would be a huge difference. I was in a class once that used the 80 = A scale once and I flipped the fuck out. Thought it wasn't even a real class for a sec, lol.
It's kinda weird how high the standards are in America (grade wise) for us to be so stupid. >_< I guess just because the standards are high it doesn't mean people are actually meeting them?
Yeah...effectively, this makes your opinion worthless tho. Like, maybe I just wanna shoot stuff? Or stab it? And I want to do so in a world I find visually appealing (varies based on the person, obviously). So if I listened to people who thought like this, I'd probably be turned off a lot of experiences that are worth my time and money. It's kinda weird, no?
Chezzymann
Member
Hard to do that when so many sites plaster the score everywhere (like at the beginning of the review) so you can't ignore it.
backbreaker65
Banned
How I wish reviews were done.
Reviewer and history in this Genre. Action Adventure
John Smart, games reviewed similar to this genre(link provided to said games)
Uncharted, Gears of War, God of War, Tomb Raider
What Version of the game did you review? Retail or Review Copy.
Developer Review copy
Difficulty, what level of difficulty, or did you play in god mode.
God Mode
How long did it take you to complete the game, with this difficulty level?
6hrs in God Mode
In what setting was the game reviewed? Dev. review event or pre-release deadline ect..
Dev Review Event
Now that we have some history about the reviewer, we then can judge accordingly, it would also be nice to see a player profile from the game he/she played too see if he or she actually played the game and not just let his little brother play the game because he/she had too many games to review at the time.
Reviewer and history in this Genre. Action Adventure
John Smart, games reviewed similar to this genre(link provided to said games)
Uncharted, Gears of War, God of War, Tomb Raider
What Version of the game did you review? Retail or Review Copy.
Developer Review copy
Difficulty, what level of difficulty, or did you play in god mode.
God Mode
How long did it take you to complete the game, with this difficulty level?
6hrs in God Mode
In what setting was the game reviewed? Dev. review event or pre-release deadline ect..
Dev Review Event
Now that we have some history about the reviewer, we then can judge accordingly, it would also be nice to see a player profile from the game he/she played too see if he or she actually played the game and not just let his little brother play the game because he/she had too many games to review at the time.
Pop
Member
No not really. A review is just another persons opinion on the game.
You should be able to decide on your own if you want to play the game or not.
Haha
"D stands for Diploma" and "Cs get degrees" were mantras within my social group.
Well this is a great point. Very well said, thanks for countering. I guess I would just say, I still think that you CAN judge games on the merits I originally pointed out, while also critiquing gameplay. But it's certainly problematic when a game is just..gameplay and not narrative elements. Or at least, it becomes harder to apply the same kind of critical analysis.
I guess my post only works, if every game was like the Last of Us. And I certainly don't think games should be like that. So damn. This is why I find it hard to look at games entirely in an artistic lens. I think there is ART in them, but it's hard to gauge that when you have to compromise with the players own experience and gameplay. No wonder it's hard for games to be approached on an academic level.
Reviews are just subjective opinions. You can't expect them to be anything more than that.
They are not law or rules or anything absolute that can be definitive and proven.
Reviews should never tell you if you will like a game. Only give you an idea, on what you might expect to experience.
I always start with interest. Does this interest me? If not, maybe enough positive feedback can sway me to be. If I am already interested, I'm trying it for myself, regardless.
They are not law or rules or anything absolute that can be definitive and proven.
Reviews should never tell you if you will like a game. Only give you an idea, on what you might expect to experience.
I always start with interest. Does this interest me? If not, maybe enough positive feedback can sway me to be. If I am already interested, I'm trying it for myself, regardless.
shadowstar
Member
The only reviews I trust these days are in the honest discourse between players in places like this or other specialized gaming forums. The numbers and opinions of the media are worthless as they offer only a one sided impression of a game. Watching good players stream on Twitch is my other go to. Often when I see video reviews done by the media I get frustrated with the bad play shown in the videos. I can't tell if the game is bad or the player is bad. Watching pro streamers usually gives me a much better idea of the game and how it should be played.
CaptainGyro
Banned
In the real world, the point of the numbers serves me just fine and I find them awesomely convenient
molnizzle
Member
The "traditional" scale in the US is:
A = 90-100
B = 80-89
C = 70-79
D = 60-69
F = 0-59
That's what the vast majority of colleges still use. However, many high schools (maybe even most?) have dropped D's altogether. Anything below a 70 is failing, and a score of 79 would earn you a C.
That's how it was for me, at least. I had to re-take senior Econ after earning a 68. -_-
CNCOMICS
Member
The popularity of Metacritic. It simply has too much pull when it comes to finances. Hell, when publishers or PR's have to tell you how to "play" a game, there's a problem.
And on a side note, getting away from the 5-point scale. In my opinion, the 10-point scale was done to allow for nitpicking and to make percentage calculation easier. 5-point is quick and easy: horrible, bad, okay, good, great. You can even condense it to 3-point: no, maybe, yes.
And on a side note, getting away from the 5-point scale. In my opinion, the 10-point scale was done to allow for nitpicking and to make percentage calculation easier. 5-point is quick and easy: horrible, bad, okay, good, great. You can even condense it to 3-point: no, maybe, yes.
SatelliteOfLove
Member
The birth of modern game journalism started with this fiasco
I'd actually say it was earlier yet also involving him.
Honestly, the return of vague, euphoric dialogue in reviews is the real danger. You can't suss out what YOU'D think of the game good or bad from their "discription"; it's all random fluff and hype words.
ShinMaruku
Member
I love numbers and review scores.
Going by Wikipedia there were more than 550 notable titles released in 2013 alone (in reality there were probably many more), imagine having to read at least three reviews on each of them just to get a vague picture of what's worthwhile? There'd be no time left to actually play the games or complain on the internet.
Review scores are still one of the best tools to narrow things down but like any tool they're only as effective as the person using them.
Er...anyway the question.
How to you take the price of the game into account when reviewing especially now there are many more price points from "free" to £60 and all sorts of shady business practices?
Is a buggy £60 AAA game that seems to have been made to sell DLC a 7/10?
If it fixes those bugs and includes all the DLC in a £20 GotY version does it deserve a higher socre?
Is a quirky cheap indy title still worth a 9 when it costs £30? Should Polygon have changed their Sim City review score? What would Tetris score if was released today?
Maybe games should adopt something like the DVD review system, they often give the movie a score on it's own artistic merits and then have a separate score rating the quality of that particular release and if the extras/clen-up/overall package is worth buying.
Going by Wikipedia there were more than 550 notable titles released in 2013 alone (in reality there were probably many more), imagine having to read at least three reviews on each of them just to get a vague picture of what's worthwhile? There'd be no time left to actually play the games or complain on the internet.
Review scores are still one of the best tools to narrow things down but like any tool they're only as effective as the person using them.
Er...anyway the question.
How to you take the price of the game into account when reviewing especially now there are many more price points from "free" to £60 and all sorts of shady business practices?
Is a buggy £60 AAA game that seems to have been made to sell DLC a 7/10?
If it fixes those bugs and includes all the DLC in a £20 GotY version does it deserve a higher socre?
Is a quirky cheap indy title still worth a 9 when it costs £30? Should Polygon have changed their Sim City review score? What would Tetris score if was released today?
Maybe games should adopt something like the DVD review system, they often give the movie a score on it's own artistic merits and then have a separate score rating the quality of that particular release and if the extras/clen-up/overall package is worth buying.
MMaRsu
Gold Member
One does not simply reviews
Steve Youngblood
Member
70 - 80 is often a grade of C in American schools, if not elsewhere (I don't know). Further, it's not atypical for teachers to grade on a curve wherein the median or mean score is adjusted so that it becomes a C. If this is one's frame of reference, 7-8 (70-80) becomes the de facto epitome of mediocrity.
The thing is, game reviewers don't necessarily review tons of actually, completely horrible games. People might bitch about games like Watch Dogs, but something like Watch Dogs might still be vastly superior & decently playable and even mostly fun in comparison to ACTUALLY crap games that barely work and have zero effort put into anything. So while Watch Dogs might be a "relatively mediocre" game, it's still a masterpiece in comparison to something like ET.
I honestly don't think reviews are that broken. there are a lot of games that get below six, but we just don't talk about them or notice them at all because they tend to be movie-licensed shovelware crap that nobody has any expectations for. A lot of the "bad" games that get 60s and 70s in their reviews that I see mentioned are games like Yoshi's new Island and Batman - Arkham Origins, games that some people actually like and consider to be okay.
Y'all are never going to adopt the metric system right?
cZarKastic
Member
I think the best review measurement would be a non-numerical one. Just categorize a game under 4 simple conclusions.
Bad
Flawed
Good
Great
Bad
Flawed
Good
Great
thebigaristotle
Banned
Das_Blarthole
Neo Member
I would say it started to happen with the Rise of Metacritic.....
Raptomex
Member
This. Without a doubt.
Long before that. It was already becoming a problem with European magazines during the mid to late nineties, which is why the 'American school grading' argument doesn't work so well either.
I stopped caring about reviews in gaming and especially in other, more narrative focused media a long time ago, let alone the scores.
If you want to hear an opinion, a quick skim of reviews from a couple of reputable sites as well as a quick glance at a forum discussion on a reputable forum should be indicative enough.
If you want to hear an opinion, a quick skim of reviews from a couple of reputable sites as well as a quick glance at a forum discussion on a reputable forum should be indicative enough.
Suzushiiro
Banned
Gross!
Crimsonsky
Member
We all knew the situation was broken. We just collectively let it slide till Gerstmanngate. Once that happened what we had always suspected, but couldn't prove, was blown wide open. It's been downhill ever since, with everyone suspected of taking money, even if they clearly aren't.
Then there's the metacritic thing, and a developer's bonus being contingent on high scores. It's absolutely absurd, and all of it comes down to some "journalist" and his review. That's undue pressure being applied to someone who should be impartial.
Then there's the metacritic thing, and a developer's bonus being contingent on high scores. It's absolutely absurd, and all of it comes down to some "journalist" and his review. That's undue pressure being applied to someone who should be impartial.
Aquamarine
Member
I don't know why people continue to trust GameSpot reviews after that scandal blew up.
To this day I still can't visit their site, knowing in full conscience that actually they fired a journalist over a bad review of a game they were promoting on their website.
BurnOutBrighter
Banned
Because there are too many good games.
You score Game X a 95. How do you say Game Z is better? You give it a score of 96.
As more better games get released, you're left with a smaller and smaller space to rate games.
This is actually a problem in many judged competitive sports. Every few years they have to recalibrate the scores to prevent score-creep.
You score Game X a 95. How do you say Game Z is better? You give it a score of 96.
As more better games get released, you're left with a smaller and smaller space to rate games.
This is actually a problem in many judged competitive sports. Every few years they have to recalibrate the scores to prevent score-creep.
breakfuss
Member
Press is damned if they do, damned if they don't. As soon as a game gets anything below an 8.0 all hell breaks loose, lol. In fact the publication most notable for doing this gets shit on the most around here. *sigh*
Wasn't aware that was a "recent" thing.
Wasn't aware that was a "recent" thing.
Add shaped
statistical
EmptySpace
Banned
exactly. read player impressions on gaf. hundreds of in-depth player impressions of one game >one person's opinions on hundreds of games.
gaming media has been a pr vehicle in recent years. it doesn't help that a lot of people from gaming media want to cross over to the gaming business, and the fact that publishers basically control the revenues of gaming websites.
hands are tied down, business is involved, more ball-licking than critical eyes.
and no, saying "controls are clunky" isn't being critical. it's being opinionated.
every podcast sounds the same. every topic comes back to the same things. it's just regurgitated opinions of "what's your favourite game of all time?" until something big happens during the week. i think i've heard more topics being raised thanks to neogaf posts than actually seeking out new things to inquire about.
whenever there's a controversy, it doesn't get followed up. there are no new interesting ways to go about anything anymore. every information is just being passed down from the pr firms, or being held back by ndas. remember when a dude called geoff keighley was suddenly talking about the story of making the game and the devs behind it rather than how the game mechanics work? now it's all, "what did you have for breakfast?", "i've been using my netflix..." topics that pervade every discussion. so many things get overlooked, and the same things get looked upon over and over and over.
this is my opinion not just on the reviews but moreso on games media as a whole. whenever i see interviews at e3 it's all the same things. "what makes your game different?", "what's different in this game than the previous one?" gosh where did gamespot's ricardo torres go? he asked sensible question and he sounded as if he actually played the games that came before the sequel.
i just want something new and fresh from the games media, and no that's polygon's tagline but you know what i mean...
Brofist
Member
By ignore he means disregard it.
Read the reviews for Titanfall. That is if you can even call them reviews since they read much more like poorly written marketing pieces for the most part. The entire system is completely broken.
The reason is a complete lack of any sort of integrity.
For some reason I have trouble imaging any well regarded movie critic engaging in the same sort of personal degradation for the sake of a few more dollars. On the other hand it also seems to be a top-down type thing:
I equally have difficulty seeing any meaningful number of movie publishers allowing a company to stamp "Wal-Mart Edition" on their boxart, or fragmenting out their DVD/blu-ray extras exclusively to particular retailers yet in video games it's more or less standard.
If I were to speculate on the reason for the lack of integrity I'd assume that it has to do with people who have little genuine interest in video games being the biggest players in the industry. When all you care about is how many 0s are at the end of your account balance it's not like integrity or pride in quality are even things.
IncandescentPrecept
Banned
No. I neither read reviews nor look at the scores. I was a big gamerankings user when I got my PS2 since I got it late. I used to get only games with 90%+ but stopped when I realised that 90%+ does not mean that I'll like the game or that 70%- means that I won't like the game.
As I read more reviews and ignore the scores, the more broken reviews are in my view. Some are just badly written, both high and low score one like they're hype ridden or no clue about the game respectively. But yes, ignoring the score is one way to better reviews. Next step will be more well written reviews, not ridiculed with hyperboles, and built by argument instead fake veil of objectivity.
Diomedeskun
Member
Honestly, I don't remember reviews ever being that great. Sure, EGM was better than Nintendo Power or Gamepro, but it was all pretty relative.