Quantcast
On a ten point review scale, what number should represent an average game?

Forums - Gaming Discussion - On a ten point review scale, what number should represent an average game?

What number should represent average on a ten point scale?

3 0 0.00%
 
4 2 1.63%
 
5 58 47.15%
 
6 38 30.89%
 
7 24 19.51%
 
8 1 0.81%
 
Total:123
Shiken said:

Average should be a 7, meaning it is a good game but nothing spectacularly impressive about it. No one should be turned away by this score.

6 should be below average. It is playable, and even fun. Worth the money for those into the style, but below the normal standard of quality.

5 means it is functional, and there is nothing left to see here.

anything below a 5 is broken, and the numbers 1-4 signify just how broken it is.

Now an 8 is above average. These games are what many people should start to consider as heavy hitters.

A nine is a must own game. These games can have their flaws, but they are considered to be overshadowed by several pros that make it a game that should not be skipped.

A 10 is near perfect in the eyes of the reviewer. Nothing is perfect, but this comes damn close.

Unfortunetly this is not how a lot of gamers see these scores. A 7 is considered bad and depending on the IP, an 8 can be seen as a let down. I have seen people skip games because they only got an 8.

At this point I believe the numbered scale is flawed. Read the review and read the list of pros and cons at the bottom. Too many people have different ideas of what each number means for it to work on an effective numbered scale.

The reason why a lot of gamers consider 7 a bad score is that they've played games that were rated as such and said games were bad. The error here isn't on gamers, but rather the reviewers with their inflation of scores.

There are significant flaws in the review process of both retail and digital-only games. Retail games that tick certain boxes like production values have a base value of about 7/10 assigned to them, so even if they suck, they can't really get a bad score. Indie games are commonly overrated as well, probably because reviewers draw comparisons to 7/10 AAA games and conclude that they enjoyed the indie game more. Thus the score inflation of AAA games carries over to indie games. The conclusion that the indie game is better may be correct, but the scores are out of line because of a fundamental error in the review process.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

Around the Network

5 is how it should be and how it was back in the day. I feel as if giving good reviews out there is due to the amount of clicks and good press to a review site (Yes same can be said when dishing out an extremely low score) however to make the kids happy lets give games 8s and 9s and they will come back to our site. Its also pretty obvious that many fanboys believe all there 1st party titles deserves 9s and 10s and anything underneath that is considered blasphemy. 

In the 90s, anything with a score of an 7 and 8 were considered must play games where as today, a game gets a 7 its considered laughable.

Angry Joe on YouTube does it right.



RolStoppable said:
Shiken said:

Average should be a 7, meaning it is a good game but nothing spectacularly impressive about it. No one should be turned away by this score.

6 should be below average. It is playable, and even fun. Worth the money for those into the style, but below the normal standard of quality.

5 means it is functional, and there is nothing left to see here.

anything below a 5 is broken, and the numbers 1-4 signify just how broken it is.

Now an 8 is above average. These games are what many people should start to consider as heavy hitters.

A nine is a must own game. These games can have their flaws, but they are considered to be overshadowed by several pros that make it a game that should not be skipped.

A 10 is near perfect in the eyes of the reviewer. Nothing is perfect, but this comes damn close.

Unfortunetly this is not how a lot of gamers see these scores. A 7 is considered bad and depending on the IP, an 8 can be seen as a let down. I have seen people skip games because they only got an 8.

At this point I believe the numbered scale is flawed. Read the review and read the list of pros and cons at the bottom. Too many people have different ideas of what each number means for it to work on an effective numbered scale.

The reason why a lot of gamers consider 7 a bad score is that they've played games that were rated as such and said games were bad. The error here isn't on gamers, but rather the reviewers with their inflation of scores.

There are significant flaws in the review process of both retail and digital-only games. Retail games that tick certain boxes like production values have a base value of about 7/10 assigned to them, so even if they suck, they can't really get a bad score. Indie games are commonly overrated as well, probably because reviewers draw comparisons to 7/10 AAA games and conclude that they enjoyed the indie game more. Thus the score inflation of AAA games carries over to indie games. The conclusion that the indie game is better may be correct, but the scores are out of line because of a fundamental error in the review process.

Very true.  There was a time when almost every game got an 8 or a 9, and anything lower was pretty bad.  Some reviewer might try to go against that trend now, but because many of the bigger review site will still rate AAA games on somewhat of a curve, it is hard to tell who is being honest.

 

So while I believe gamers have had their perspectives mislead at times, it is deffinetly the reviewers from (I wanna say mid PS360 days?) that started the trend.  I understand why some people think the way that they do.

 

But again, this just further enforces the fact that the numbered review system has become so flawed in general that it should just be done away with all together.



5. Otherwise, why do it out of 10, and not just 5?

Shiken said:

Very true.  There was a time when almost every game got an 8 or a 9, and anything lower was pretty bad.  Some reviewer might try to go against that trend now, but because many of the bigger review site will still rate AAA games on somewhat of a curve, it is hard to tell who is being honest.

So while I believe gamers have had their perspectives mislead at times, it is deffinetly the reviewers from (I wanna say mid PS360 days?) that started the trend.  I understand why some people think the way that they do.

But again, this just further enforces the fact that the numbered review system has become so flawed in general that it should just be done away with all together.

Scoreless reviews aren't really helpful. Reviewers should be able to commit to a clear summary of the product they are reviewing.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

Around the Network
Soooo after reviewing the results of the thread I noticed two things.

1. Most people agree that 5 should be the number assigned to an average game.

2. A game that gets a 5 is not worth buying.

Or to use Rol's argument: Most of the bad games are not reviewed and that drives the average review score up. If all games were reviewed the average review score would be 5, not 7.

^^^This argument implies that your average game is not worth buying. A lot of what other people said, in the thread, echoed this. I'd quote them, but I'm lazy and hate doing multi-quote responses.

Currently playing: Enter the Gungeon

7/10 should be average, a 5/10 sounds pretty mediocre imo since to me it implies a failing grade of an E or F as opposed to the former which is a C.

Currently Playing: Splatoon 2, LoZ: Breath of the Wild, Fortnite, and Fallout Shelter

Cerebralbore101 said:
Soooo after reviewing the results of the thread I noticed two things.

1. Most people agree that 5 should be the number assigned to an average game.

2. A game that gets a 5 is not worth buying.

Or to use Rol's argument: Most of the bad games are not reviewed and that drives the average review score up. If all games were reviewed the average review score would be 5, not 7.

^^^This argument implies that your average game is not worth buying. A lot of what other people said, in the thread, echoed this. I'd quote them, but I'm lazy and hate doing multi-quote responses.

Only the first sentence of what you present as my argument is correct. But if all games were reviewed (consoles, PC, mobile), the average review score would come in below 5 if 5 were used for games of average quality (l would define 'average' as "no strong feelings one way or another"). There's a lot of crap out there.

A game of average quality isn't worth buying at its original MSRP, simply because there's enough choice in higher quality tiers nowadays. Bad games would be those that aren't worth buying at any price.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

RolStoppable said:
Cerebralbore101 said:
Soooo after reviewing the results of the thread I noticed two things.

1. Most people agree that 5 should be the number assigned to an average game.

2. A game that gets a 5 is not worth buying.

Or to use Rol's argument: Most of the bad games are not reviewed and that drives the average review score up. If all games were reviewed the average review score would be 5, not 7.

^^^This argument implies that your average game is not worth buying. A lot of what other people said, in the thread, echoed this. I'd quote them, but I'm lazy and hate doing multi-quote responses.

Only the first sentence of what you present as my argument is correct. But if all games were reviewed (consoles, PC, mobile), the average review score would come in below 5 if 5 were used for games of average quality (l would define 'average' as "no strong feelings one way or another"). There's a lot of crap out there.

A game of average quality isn't worth buying at its original MSRP, simply because there's enough choice in higher quality tiers nowadays. Bad games would be those that aren't worth buying at any price.

Ah, thanks for clearing that up. So you're saying that if all games were reviewed then the average would dip below 5/10, right? 

IMO a game of average quality (when you count all games in the manner that we're talking about) isn't worth buying at all. There's too many higher quality games out there, like you said. 



Currently playing: Enter the Gungeon

Cerebralbore101 said:

Ah, thanks for clearing that up. So you're saying that if all games were reviewed then the average would dip below 5/10, right? 

IMO a game of average quality (when you count all games in the manner that we're talking about) isn't worth buying at all. There's too many higher quality games out there, like you said. 

Yes, the average review score would be below 5 if all games were reviewed. Steam and mobile are notorious for being infested with total stinkers and it happens that such games get ported to consoles.

For example, Switch's game library of 300 titles could split roughly into 75 good games (score of 6 or higher), 75 average games (score of 5) and 150 bad games (score of 4 or lower). You'd end up with an average review score of below 5 because the crap outnumbers the gems. I haven't done any real statistics on the Switch library, but when I look through the weekly releases, the majority of games don't look like something that is worth buying. That isn't any different with other consoles. Or in a broader sense, it's the norm in any form of entertainment that the majority of what is produced is below average quality.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club