Support NeoGAF

[seismologist]

I've almost given up on the current scoring system.
When GTA3 gets a 9.9 or DOAU gets a 9.3 it doesn't tell me anything anymore.
So if a sequel is 1/10 point better than the last version that doesn't really mean
it's worth $50 if you already have the last one.

There needs to be a "Value" category so you can tell how much the game has improved over the last version.
IGN did it with Mario Kart DD. They gave it a 7.9 for not being a big enough improvement over the sequel and everyone went nuts about it.

You guys think this would work?

 

[Wario64]

They just need to get rid of scores, period

 

[Deg]

They just need to get rid of scores, period

or score backwards.

 

[Mr_Furious]

The problem isn't the score but more the varying agendas that might be obligated therein. Also comparing scores of GTA to that of DOA doesn't make much sense to me because they're 2 distinctly separate genres, which should be taken into consideration, imo.

 

[seismologist]

well yeah not looking at the score is one way but I still want to know how much the game has improved.

 

[kaching]

When GTA3 gets a 9.9 or DOAU gets a 9.3 it doesn't tell me anything anymore.

What do you want it to tell you?!? Both games got higher than a 9!!!

 

[Mr_Furious]

well yeah not looking at the score is one way but I still want to know how much the game has improved.

Unfortunately, I don't think reviewers are required to play the prior game before being unleashed on it's respective sequel(s).

 

[WarPig]

I would commit murder to be able to use Roger Ebert's four-star review system. Sigh.

DFS.

 

[aerodynamik]

Natural numbers plus behavin' like a bad mutha! I think pretty much any game can be fit in a scale of 10 or 11 (if you count 0 in) grades. I wouldn't rate more than a handful of games a year above 9. Of course I'm not getting bribed either. Wish I was.

For next gen my bet is they'll switch to hexadecimal to rate from 0 to 8, 9, A, B, C, D, E, F.

 

[EAJAPAN]

They just need to get rid of scores, period

Agreed.

 

[JasoNsider]

They just need to get rid of scores, period

Exactly.

 

[Property of Jumpship]

They just need: Worth Buying, Worth Renting, Forget it, and let the text say the rest.

 

[aerodynamik]

Why? Scores are not evil, if used the way they should. I agree in that not all games need to be rated nor any reviewer should be forced to rate a game if not feeling so inclined. But sometimes a number gives you a pretty good idea of what to expect, specially a mediocre one.

 

[impirius]

My ideal system:
- Integers 1 to 7
- 4 is an average game

Using a different scale would get help to get rid of the 'stigma' that average scores currently have. Plenty of 2-star movies are worth seeing, depending on your tastes; plenty of 3 or 4 star games would be worth playing if you enjoyed the characters or genre. This scale offers more flexibility than the standard 4-star system for movies while remaining general enough to be seen as an easy reference instead of a meticulously calculated Official Final Score (R) (TM).

 

[Dave Long]

Thumbs up or thumbs down should be the only scoring. Unfortunately, that would make 90% of the wishy washy reviewers' heads explode out there. They'd be forced to actually recommend or not recommend something. Heaven forbid that happen.

 

[aku:jiki]

Scores aren't the problem, they're fine. The problem is the writers. You'd need an industry of "journalists" that don't go "BUT OMG IT'S ZELDA AUTOMATIC 9!!!!"... but that ain't happening anytime soon.

 

[sonycowboy]

I've almost given up on the current scoring system.
When GTA3 gets a 9.9 or DOAU gets a 9.3 it doesn't tell me anything anymore.
So if a sequel is 1/10 point better than the last version that doesn't really mean
it's worth $50 if you already have the last one.

There needs to be a "Value" category so you can tell how much the game has improved over the last version.
IGN did it with Mario Kart DD. They gave it a 7.9 for not being a big enough improvement over the sequel and everyone went nuts about it.

You guys think this would work?

Here's a hint. Read the f'ing review.

 

[aku:jiki]

Thumbs up or thumbs down should be the only scoring. Unfortunately, that would make 90% of the wishy washy reviewers' heads explode out there. They'd be forced to actually recommend or not recommend something. Heaven forbid that happen.

I don't find that very fair to any involved party, though. Everything isn't just white or black. A game can be "just ok" too, you know.

 

[captainbiotch]

Here's a hint. Read the f'ing review.

haha, winner.

 

[Hitler Stole My Potato]

I suggest the classic Kenny Rogers point scale.

13 Kennys = classic Gambler

9 Kennys = roasted chicken

5 Kennys = Lady

1 Kenny = corn muffins

 

[Dave Long]

I don't find that very fair to any involved party, though. Everything isn't just white or black. A game can be "just ok" too, you know.

That's why every review has text to go with it. Siskel and Ebert never needed any in between ratings. They either recommended a film or didn't. There was no in between other than their own potentially divided opinions. EGM would be perfect for this format. They already have multiple people reviewing a game. Why not ditch the scores and just say your piece with either a thumbs up or down?

The problem with most game reviews is that the reviewers cannot make up their mind on anything so they end up writing a whole lot of words that have no actual basis in criticism or praise for the game. It just reads like a malaise of feelings with no definitive answer for anyone. Take that away from them and force the reviewers to actually make up their minds on something and you end up with better reviews.

I've been writing these things for six years now. The best reviews I've written were probably the 300 word ones I've done for CGM because I had to tell you in no uncertain terms what I liked and disliked and put a score on that. A score out of five stars which DFS would probably find liberating. It's only got one star more than Ebert's.

P.S. - Reviews, by definition, are not really "fair". They're opinions.

 

[skip]

I suggest the classic Kenny Rogers point scale.

13 Kennys = classic Gambler

9 Kennys = roasted chicken

5 Kennys = Lady

1 Kenny = corn muffins

I agree with your ideas, and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

 

[LukeSmith]

I would commit murder to be able to use Roger Ebert's four-star review system. Sigh.

DFS.

DFS,
Explain why you would, this could be an interesting point you may make.

LMS

 

[Mrbob]

I suggest the classic Kenny Rogers point scale.

13 Kennys = classic Gambler

9 Kennys = roasted chicken

5 Kennys = Lady

1 Kenny = corn muffins

:lol

You're on a roll tonight! :lol

 

[slayn]

They just need to get rid of scores, period

indeed, a thumbs up/thumbs down at a maximum

 

[CrimsonSkies]

Scores should be - A+, A, B, C, D, F

 

[LukeSmith]

Scores aren't the problem, they're fine. The problem is the writers. You'd need an industry of "journalists" that don't go "BUT OMG IT'S ZELDA AUTOMATIC 9!!!!"... but that ain't happening anytime soon.

But DUDE when our advertisers are paying us so much for our scores you have to give Zelda at least a 9. We need the ad revenue. /weakest sauce.

 

[Oxymoron]

They just need: Worth Buying, Worth Renting, Forget it, and let the text say the rest.

Direct hit.
Hit.
Miss.
Dud.

 

[etiolate]

I suggest the classic Kenny Rogers point scale.

13 Kennys = classic Gambler

9 Kennys = roasted chicken

5 Kennys = Lady

1 Kenny = corn muffins

I agree and would like to state that Metroid Prime: Echoes shall receive a score of Lady.

 

[AbeFroman]

Anvil uses 1-10 skulls.

However, it reserves 666 Skulls for the ultimate in recorded death metal.

 

[Bebpo]

They just need to get rid of scores, period

But then imagine the horror of Famitsu reviews:

Man walks fast. His feet look the right size. I like being able to jump. The story is new to me. The menu could have had more buttons

 

[DDayton]

I think a 4/5 star system would be the best. Using a 10/100 point scale just means that everyone associates the scores with school grades, and that means that most games get between a 70 and an 80. We effectively HAVE a 4 star system anyway, as most review outlets rarely score anything below a 7.

I don't think the "thumbs up, thumbs down" style of S&E would work with games, as the cost of a new game is much more than that of going to see a new film. Folks want a better sense of HOW good a game is, so that if they are on the fence the rating can help them decide between two games.

Text reviews are good, but I think folks forget why the "average consumer" wants a point total: if you have two games which both interest you, but you can only purchase one, a score provides a clear distinction between the two. Comparing two written reviews is easy when the writer(s) have radical differences in opinion as to the quality of the games being reviewed, but when both games are in the "good to decent" range, text can become muddy. By playing the game, someone can understand why the reviewer wrote about it in a certain way, but the review itself might leave the average consumer unclear as to which game is a better choice in the given situation.

 

[Warm Machine]

I would commit murder to be able to use Roger Ebert's four-star review system. Sigh.

DFS.

Eberts reviews are actually out of 10. He uses zero stars to start out with and also uses half stars. So a 3 and a half star review is really a 9/10

 

[Scrow]

while we're on topic of reviews... does anyone bother reading reviews that are several pages long? I can't be bothered reading all that and usually skip to the last page to read the closing comments.

 

[cool_dude_2049]

All that they need to do is just list all the facts about the game and let the ppl decide on that.

but they are not going to do that, because ppl dont read, they like numbers.

and since everyone's opinions are different, its just a matter of you renting/buying the game itself and deciding for yourself

 

[Jonnyram]

sucks/meh/rocks is all you need.

 

[TheGreenGiant]

I've almost given up on the current scoring system.
When GTA3 gets a 9.9 or DOAU gets a 9.3 it doesn't tell me anything anymore.
So if a sequel is 1/10 point better than the last version that doesn't really mean
it's worth $50 if you already have the last one.

There needs to be a "Value" category so you can tell how much the game has improved over the last version.
IGN did it with Mario Kart DD. They gave it a 7.9 for not being a big enough improvement over the sequel and everyone went nuts about it.

You guys think this would work?

YOU NEED TO LEARN TO READ THE REVIEW TEXT AND DECIDE FOR YOURSELF. SMART GAMERS UNITE.

 

[xsarien]

How about this:
If you're not sure whether or not you want a game - as opposed to games your going to buy regardless of what others may think of it (e.g., GTA, Halo 2, Metroid Prime 2) - just take that $5 or so you'd blow on a magazine and just rent the stupid thing instead.