Support NeoGAF

[MC Safety]

I originally hated it, but soon came to love Daily Radar.com's four-point grading scale.

Direct hit-hit-miss-dud.

Everybody else on the planet hated it and kept on hating it. For me, it really forced a reviewer to decide whether a game was good or bad, whereas a five-point scale tends to be a dumping ground for the easy way out -- a three. It also put a lot of emphasis on the review text because the critic then had to be very specific about how much a game was a hit or miss.

 

[Pellham]

Santa, Famitsu's review scale is a joke.

Anyway more on subject, I think 10/10 should be possible. It shouldn't also just be reserved for "perfect" games, but can include games that are as close to perfection as possible.

IMO you can define a perfect game as a game with:
1. no flaws (a flaw being defined as an element that has a clear negative impact on the overall gameplay or experience)
2. cannot be improved (that means significant improvement, not infitisemal improvement)
3. is not a remake.

So what can you clearly see as a perfect game? The original Tetris.

 

[Mr. Lemming]

Santa, Famitsu's review scale is a joke.

Anyway more on subject, I think 10/10 should be possible. It shouldn't also just be reserved for "perfect" games, but can include games that are as close to perfection as possible.

IMO you can define a perfect game as a game with:
1. no flaws (a flaw being defined as an element that has a clear negative impact on the overall gameplay or experience)
2. cannot be improved (that means significant improvement, not infitisemal improvement)
3. is not a remake.

So what can you clearly see as a perfect game? The original Tetris.

Why #3? The New Tetris on the N64 is superior to the original Tetris

 

[Wellington]

10 = Perfection, and so far, R&C3 has gotten perfect scores.

 

[Quartet]

score should not be in an interval. a game should be like a pinball score system, able to reach 1,000,000 eventually. a x/10 score is a relation of the game to the game itself, it's quite stupid!!!

a point score system allow the relation to be made between games that exist and not with an hypotetical greatness game you have imaginated.

My theory is that score should stabilise at some score eventually, until a breakthru gameplay twiss allow whole new generation of game to over magnitude order better game.

The problem is that some new game get score of 8/10 when 10,000 previous games are far better. It should be possible that a good game get 3/10 from time to time.

Another thing that is lacking in game scroring is the age-ing factor. Some game should not merit keeping their scrore, they should be degraded. Easier to do in internet ranking, but mag could do some score revisiting from time to time. Not review again, just like stock quotes in papers, numbermania.

 

[ferricide]

gamerankings doesn't do any kind of normalization?

gamerankings actually flat-out refused to do so when asked, in fact.

I originally hated it, but soon came to love Daily Radar.com's four-point grading scale.

Direct hit-hit-miss-dud.

actually, i'm a big proponent of red / yellow / green.