Jaicee said:
Scoobes said:
Every scoring system will have some bias to it, but I wanted to have a way to score that encapsulates when a game that I know has been polished and displays close to perfection (and is therefore enjoyable) vs a game that I know is technically less polished, has more annoyances/bugs but has a setting, environment, art style etc. that speaks more to my personal preferences.
As an example: Assassins Creed: Odyssey vs Red Dead Redemption 2
I played both for the same amount of time, but Red Dead Redemption 2 in nearly every way is a more complete package, right down to the horse riding system and animations through to environmental details, writing and characters. I enjoyed playing through and appreciated the depth and detail, but the setting is completely forgettable to me. Therefore, Odyssey ends up with a lower Initial and Modern Score, but higher average as the I love the ancient Greek setting and the emotional connection is much stronger.
By the same boat, the Initial and Modern scores are tailored to account for the difference in older games. Nearly all PS1/N64 games for instance have aged badly, but were revolutionary for their time.
|
*shrugs* Okay. Whatever approach makes the most sense to you. Sounds like you have one that's well-thought-out and considered!
For me, when I read a simple instruction to "post your top 50 games", I interpret that as a simple call for a favorites list, not an academic exercise in professional games criticism. That's just me, I guess.
|
Your approach is how I started when Smeags first started this event years ago. After a couple of years it developed into the insane method I have now!
I kept finding new games I played that year that I wanted to add but also remembering old classics I wanted to keep and didn't have a way to sort which ones I actually wanted to have in the top 50. So I ended up with my current method!
