Game score system - What do you prefer?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Folder
  • Start date Start date
F

Folder

Unconfirmed Member
Just a quickie:
Which scoring system do you prefer?
We have been using a lettered grade system though I feel this misses a certain amount of impact as games media readers are simply conditioned to react to */10 or percentage scores.
Or am I wrong?
:)
 
No scores. Failing that, use my patented fruit-base scoring system. In which, for example, Eternal Eyes on PSX might receive half a damson, Halo 2 on XBox would get two starfruit, and the GBA port of Final Fantasy I and II would score a banana and a kiwi fruit.
 
trippingmartian said:
Multiple reviewer scores accompanied by list of +/- aspects of game.
Click to expand...
Yes, but multiple scores in what format you donut!? ;-)
 
1-100

But I like to see multiple reviews (ala gamerankings.com) because the end all be all of reviewers will be myself.

The numbers give me a chance to gauge whether or not a game is worth a purchase... I try to stay away from reviews that could possibly give away plot (RPGs, Action, etc.)

Once I play a game, I will normally go back and read reviewers feelings to see if we share the same sentiments.
 
Percentage scores suck, what's the difference between 93 and 92?

10 point scales are too much as well, imo.

a 7 point scale with no decimals should be fine. And people SHOULD use the lower end of the scales.

7 - Excellent
6 - Very Good
5 - Good
4 - Mediocre
3 - Disappointing
2 - Poor
1 - Terrible
 
If you insist on a numeric/grade system, the less possible scores the better. Percentage scores (and equivalents) are just ludicrous. Go binary (0 - Not a good game, 1 - A good game).
 
cybamerc said:
With Spong I feel it doesn't matter what grading system is used.
Click to expand...
SPOnG's reviews simply set the standard online right now. Read anything thus published. Different and new team to rest of site. Not something I really want to get into. Blind hate is at your own discretion. Just try reading *any* of them. Or don't. I couldn't give a shit.
Gattsu25 said:
I prefer to find thr author's opinion by reading the text
Click to expand...
Sadly you comprise 1% of readers. Sadly... It's always scores that generate reaction as it underlines with finality, augmenting opinion with something tangible. Which I think, is a shame.
Do The Mario said:
The “jizzOmeter”
Click to expand...
*sigh* That is the impossible dream. :)
Thanks for any advice offered!
Edit: Random wedding update - Picked up rings today. Burst into tears in jewellery store. Oh god, I'm doomed!
 
Folder said:
We have been using a lettered grade system though I feel this misses a certain amount of impact as games media readers are simply conditioned to react to */10 or percentage scores.
Click to expand...
I think you're right about that. And, letter grading systems make no sense to people from countries where they use a different grading system in school. It just doesn't "click" as fast for us as it does for, say, an american.

Also, 1-10 is preferrable over 1-100. Seriously, guys, what's the difference between a 92 and a 93? Anyone?
 
iapetus said:
If you insist on a numeric/grade system, the less possible scores the better. Percentage scores (and equivalents) are just ludicrous. Go binary (0 - Not a good game, 1 - A good game).
Click to expand...
Are you Sibz/Moston Hawk?
 
I like a 4 star (point) system, that way the reviewer has to decide if the game truly is good, 3 stars, or if it's actually not that good, 2 stars.
 
If there must be scores, then numbers, out of a maximum of 10 (no decimals), but 5 should be more than sufficient. Scores are subjective so minute detail like a 0.1 difference is unneccessary.

I think it's more the range of scores where the problem lies. As someone else already said, reviewers are stupidly reluctant to use the full range properly, and so we end up in a situation where anything below a 7 is unplayable rubbish with 8s being barely worth the time.
 
tahrikmili said:
Percentage scores suck, what's the difference between 93 and 92?

10 point scales are too much as well, imo.

a 7 point scale with no decimals should be fine. And people SHOULD use the lower end of the scales.

7 - Excellent
6 - Very Good
5 - Good
4 - Mediocre
3 - Disappointing
2 - Poor
1 - Terrible
Click to expand...

We used that scale when I worked for MSN Games. I used it for 2 years and never really grew to like it, though it's better than the stupid percentage scale where only the top 40% seem to be used these days. My favourite scale was Next Generation's no-nonsense five star scale.
 
Folder said:
Originally Posted by iapetus:
If you insist on a numeric/grade system, the less possible scores the better. Percentage scores (and equivalents) are just ludicrous. Go binary (0 - Not a good game, 1 - A good game).


Are you Sibz/Moston Hawk?
Click to expand...

Man... I was just about to say that. This is clearly the way forward for games reviews. 1/0 scores with yes/no one-word reviews. Everything else is simply a compromise.

I quite like the grading system, although a score out of 0-10 would be perfectly sensible. Or how about of score from 17-143?

And also I think reviews should be accompanied by a google-image-search picture representing how the reviewer felt after playing that game... ie Katamari Damacy= a big fat happy gaylord skipping through a meadow and Goldeneye Rogue Agent= a bloody booger.
 
I really liked EGM's old review sections. The individual assesment of graphics, sounds, etc. Four reviewers were the bomb, you'd get a compilation or ideas, and then maybe someone you agreed(disagreed) with. No matter what, I almost always found a reviewer who's opinion matched mine by a little. And it was easier to find game of the month! I miss old EGM : [
 
Mecha Gandhi said:
Man... I was just about to say that. This is clearly the way forward for games reviews. 1/0 scores with yes/no one-word reviews.
Click to expand...

That's far from what I want. 1/0 scores with in-depth insightful reviews is ideal. Scoring systems are a crutch for the hard-of-thinking fanboy who just wants to be able to declare that GTA: San Andreas is better than Halo, or Myst is better than Mario Tennis (both 'true' according to gamerankings.com...)

I'd also like to see multiple reviewers, but given text space rather than the ability to score. Give the main review over to one person, but allow two or three other opinions (preferably different ones, unless everyone felt the same about the game) a column.
 
You know, if you really must have a scoring system, having something akin to school grades could work, since there's already an established view about what's excellent, good, average, etc., in the minds of the readers.

If you want further granularity, you could use +/- as well. It's the same as GA's review scoring system, though they generally suck at reviewing.

A good scoring system won't fix crappy reviews, so just have that in mind. In-depth reviews that SUPPORT a score is key for the score to really work. Otherwise, it all becomes a mess.

:p
 
Hello Stef.

1 - Did you burst into tears because of the price, or because of the sentiment?

2 - You're right. Numbers (see the crappy pointless bantering over Edge scores) are more popular. Out of 10 makes sense. Percentages are for anal retentives.

3 - The JizzOmeter is a great idea. Or perhaps breasts instead of stars. 5 breasts is a must own, four breasts is recommended but not as essential and for games that are very very shit, a pair of saggy breasts, or even a pair of bollocks.

4 - Or you could just employ a 'would buy', 'would rent', 'wouldn't buy but would rent', 'would not wipe arse with it' system.

My two pence...
 
game scores should all just be "well i liked this game, but i could see why people wouldn't." or "i didn't like this game, but i could see why people could."

all in the interest of fairness.
 
iapetus said:
That's far from what I want. 1/0 scores with in-depth insightful reviews is ideal. Scoring systems are a crutch for the hard-of-thinking fanboy who just wants to be able to declare that GTA: San Andreas is better than Halo, or Myst is better than Mario Tennis (both 'true' according to gamerankings.com...)
Click to expand...
But the 1/0 scale is exclusively useful for casual buyers. They're the ones that need to know if Halo 2 is worth the money or not, and nothing else. Those of us who play more games than is probably healthy need a more more in-depth review than "yes" or "no". And if you're going to remove that from the scoring, you're going to have to start writing it in the text instead. Scores with more nuances seem like a better idea, since it leaves the text some more freedom.
 
That's fine if you assume that everyone looks for the same things in games, but they don't. The review is always going to be the most important thing, and that should be reflected by the attention that's given to it. I don't even want a 1/0 ranking system. You should be making your game purchasing decisions on something that's more relevant to you than that - impressions of the gameplay (or whatever else influences you in your decision of whether a game is good or bad). Sure, you can make an attempt to make the scoring system represent this in some way or another, but you're better off concentrating on making the review text do it.

And screw the people who don't have sufficient attention span to actually read a review. They deserve to blow £40 on Driv3r.
 
iapetus said:
And screw the people who don't have sufficient attention span to actually read a review. They deserve to blow £40 on Driv3r.
Click to expand...
You might say that, but it's how the world works. In a utopian society, there'd be no war and people would actually read the reviews. But we're still building more efficient nukes, so there you go.

But, that's the thing. I think the 0/1 scoring assumes that everyone has the same preferences more than a 1-10 scale does. With more nuances, you can put it in perspective. Compare similar games and such. If two FPS' come out, that are both 1's, how are the score readers supposed to know which to get?
 
By reading the reviews. The same way they should if they were graded on a 1-10 scale and one got 9 and the other 7. The difference there is that there's more of a temptation to get the wrong game for them just because it got the higher mark.
 
As time has passed I've kept revising the depth down for my preferrred scale.

At this point I pretty much favor a 5 star system. Three says it's the usual; four says take notice and 5 knocks you socks off. Then if you're interested enough, read the actual review.
 
I prefer IGN's system with multiple reviewers. Break down categories and give an overall score not based on average. But have multiple ones. EGM's I like a lot too though. Oh, and Famitsu's got a cool system down too.
 
J2 Cool said:
I prefer IGN's system with multiple reviewers. Break down categories and give an overall score not based on average. But have multiple ones. EGM's I like a lot too though. Oh, and Famitsu's got a cool system down too.
Click to expand...

IT GIVES ME THE FEELING OF MADDEN NFL!

DFS.
 
WarPig said:
The little clapping man from the San Francisco Chronicle.

DFS.
Click to expand...

isn't that like Gamepro though :lol

4.5.jpg
 
iapetus said:
If you insist on a numeric/grade system, the less possible scores the better. Percentage scores (and equivalents) are just ludicrous. Go binary (0 - Not a good game, 1 - A good game).
Click to expand...


Ebert and Roeper seem to have a lot of success with that system. I can't wait until game reviewers start using it.
 
I prefer the 2 point scale...


1 - Nintendo Published game
0 - Non-Nintendo Published game
 
4 stars (and no half stars either).

0 stars - garbage
1 star - below average
2 stars - average game
3 stars - good
4 stars - great (not perfect because nothing is)
 
I'm one of those people that actually likes the 1-100 with decimals. I don't know why but I think it gives the reviewer the ability to give a game a tiny bit more than something else that he thought was great.
And it's funny to watch all the people online freak out over a .4 difference between two games. I love that. :lol
 
The simpler the better. Frankly, the difference between a 91 and a 93 is meaningless. I would say the five-star system is the best. That was, when Metroid Prime, GTA:SA, and Halo all get five stars, people aren't tripping.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

You burn in Hellfire what game do you play?
34
309
Wonko_C replied
  • Poll
Fighting games, or Hero Shooters, which do you prefer?
Analysis 
25
1K
Danjin44 replied
How complex gameplay do you prefer?
2
83
3K
tr1p1ex replied
You have to order an absolutely absurd AAAA game - what do you tell them to make?
2
68
69
Mhmmm 2077 replied
How do you select what to play?
18
136
Danjin44 replied
Top Bottom