MrSerrels said:
If any of you guys are on twitter, you should hop on and search the hashtag #gamescore.
Pretty epic discussion going on about review scores.
I'm @Serrels by the way.
I added a few things and forgot to include the hashtag, then couldn't be bothered editing them. The problem I see with review scores is an assumption of consistency across all review outlets by consumers when it comes to scoring scales and the ouroboric effect this has on those outlets to make their reviews relevant to Metacritic and its audience. It's pointless for a review outlet to put any thought into their review scale if their criteria don't match the homogenised ouputs provided by Metacritic and as consumers adapt their expectations to match, it becomes even more important for the review to maintain relevance.
Further, I feel that most reviewers inadvertantly award Michelin stars as a result of this homogenisation. Take for example the 1-10 scale; in reality anything from 1-7 is has underperformed and it's only 8, 9 and 10 that garner attention. Similarly on a 1-5 scale, 1-2 are reviewed as poor and 3-5 worthly of consideration. The review outlets are bagged for subscribing to this method but in reality, who's fault is this, theirs or ours?
For reference, the Michelin guide awards one to three stars to a small number of restaurants of outstanding quality. One star indicates a "very good cuisine in its category", a two-star ranking represents "excellent cuisine, worth a detour," and three stars are awarded to restaurants offering "exceptional cuisine, worth a special journey" (from Wikipedia).