Bumblebeetuna
Member
Examples?
Of magazines? Old school EGM, GameFan, PSM.
Examples?
Edge magazine scored GTA3 a 6 back in the day, nothing mid about that my friend.
No one has ever seen a game they're looking forward to get a 6 and think "nice!".
it's a bad score.
This is funny cause before college, educators are also encouraged to give out 50's as pity points because it's mathematically impossible for a student to reach an average of 70 if their scores so far are low enough. So really, it's more like the the grades are from 50 to 100. Used to be that high school graduates are in for a rough awakening once they get to the merciless profs in colleges and universities but I hear that's changing too. If you fail them too early in their college life, then they're a lot less likely to keep trying and paying for the rest of their coursework.I actually learned something about scores not that long ago.
For the longest time, I was really confused why, particularly on american places online, scores below 8 were considered mediocre, and then below 7 was considered bad, this was always very weird to me, because if you rate out of 10, then 5 is the average, 5 is mediocre.
I even remember one time here on gaf when I talked about how 5 should be the medium line, the average, and a guy told me that if you have 5 at school, you failed, that 5 wasn't average. There again, I didn't understand what was going on.
And then, not long ago, I learned that this is apparently all related to the american score grading scale, which is, for some reason, uneven. From what I understood, the middle line out of 10 in america is... 7, not 5, and anything below a 7 means you failed. When I read about this, I started understanding that one guy one neogaf before who talked like that, but it's still super weird to me, why would 7 be the middle ground, why is it uneven like that? lol
I also think it's a shame that video game scores are done the same way, I don't see why it has to be like school, and I think this system is flawed because it gives a very broken scale, making the measurement not accurate enough.
With this system, basically anything below 6 doesn't even exist, so you just have 6 to 10 to rate games, instead of a wider and more precise range. I think it's stupid.
I think this is the biggest thing. Culturally it's very similar to the school system as you said. When I see games get a game get a 7 I just think, a probably fun game to pass the time by, might have some technical issues but other wise still playable and could be very enjoyable to some. Other people think a 7 is dumpster juice.I actually learned something about scores not that long ago.
For the longest time, I was really confused why, particularly on american places online, scores below 8 were considered mediocre, and then below 7 was considered bad, this was always very weird to me, because if you rate out of 10, then 5 is the average, 5 is mediocre.
I even remember one time here on gaf when I talked about how 5 should be the medium line, the average, and a guy told me that if you have 5 at school, you failed, that 5 wasn't average. There again, I didn't understand what was going on.
And then, not long ago, I learned that this is apparently all related to the american score grading scale, which is, for some reason, uneven. From what I understood, the middle line out of 10 in america is... 7, not 5, and anything below a 7 means you failed. When I read about this, I started understanding that one guy one neogaf before who talked like that, but it's still super weird to me, why would 7 be the middle ground, why is it uneven like that? lol
I also think it's a shame that video game scores are done the same way, I don't see why it has to be like school, and I think this system is flawed because it gives a very broken scale, making the measurement not accurate enough.
With this system, basically anything below 6 doesn't even exist, so you just have 6 to 10 to rate games, instead of a wider and more precise range. I think it's stupid.
Nope, also flawed and very, very fickle.
^A decent scoring system I will glance at.
HmmScores don't matter.
This
Is a better game than this:
(or better than rebirth but I am not going there just yet)
I actually learned something about scores not that long ago.
For the longest time, I was really confused why, particularly on american places online, scores below 8 were considered mediocre, and then below 7 was considered bad, this was always very weird to me, because if you rate out of 10, then 5 is the average, 5 is mediocre.
I even remember one time here on gaf when I talked about how 5 should be the medium line, the average, and a guy told me that if you have 5 at school, you failed, that 5 wasn't average. There again, I didn't understand what was going on.
And then, not long ago, I learned that this is apparently all related to the american score grading scale, which is, for some reason, uneven. From what I understood, the middle line out of 10 in america is... 7, not 5, and anything below a 7 means you failed. When I read about this, I started understanding that one guy one neogaf before who talked like that, but it's still super weird to me, why would 7 be the middle ground, why is it uneven like that? lol
I also think it's a shame that video game scores are done the same way, I don't see why it has to be like school, and I think this system is flawed because it gives a very broken scale, making the measurement not accurate enough.
With this system, basically anything below 6 doesn't even exist, so you just have 6 to 10 to rate games, instead of a wider and more precise range. I think it's stupid.
Scores don't matter.
This
Is a better game than this:
(or better than rebirth but I am not going there just yet)
I am always this right !Are you always this high?
Three star/prong system. Poor Average Excellent Cuts out the BS and makes the reviewer commit.4 star systems average.
* below average
** average
*** above average
**** well above average
Mario Kart: Double Dash is not a tenth above 7.9We need less fractions when we rate games. 1 to 100 is ridiculous. What determines if a game gets 78 or 79, for instance? It's just random numbers at this point.
1 to 10 is also too much.
The best is the mid-90's CVG magazine 1 to 5. The best games would get a "high five" and you didn't have to compare them. Doesn't matter if OOT is better than, say Resident Evil or BOTW. They all get the same 5/5 score because they are all objectively great games, everything else is subjective. 4 also means the games are great but not as much to become real classics. 3 means pretty average or "OK". 2 means the game is pretty bad with some good parts and 1 is simply the worst games.
Much simpler and much more objective and on point.
Is there any truth to this? I've been gaming for a long time and I don't recall a 6 EVER being a good score for a game. Even 7s were very flawed games. I also think getting 10s was much easier back then at least from major publications excluding the most biased publications.
I remember Rise to Honor a game I was really excited about. It has a metacritic score of a 68. It was a bad game.
If anything I think getting a higher grade was easier back in the day. Lots of 80s that were really average games back then.
That's there opinion.Edge magazine scored GTA3 a 6 back in the day, nothing mid about that my friend.
5 is the very definition of mid.
Don't get me started on 7's.
It's actually like this in France, /20 is the norm here, not 10. The big difference is that here the whole scale is used.(1-20 for bizarre reason
I also had a ton of fun with the game, glad I gave it a shot and didn't listen to those naysayers.I might have to unwrap it and play it
If I can find where I put it...
Alan Wake 2 must be terrible because Forespoken is a hard 6/10.Scores don't matter.
This
Is a better game than this:
(or better than rebirth but I am not going there just yet)
Scores don't matter.
This
Is a better game than this:
(or better than rebirth but I am not going there just yet)
5/10 commentScores are stupid regardless