By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

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%
 
4 2 1.63%
 
5 58 47.15%
 
6 38 30.89%
 
7 24 19.51%
 
8 1 0.81%
 
Total:123
DonFerrari on 07 January 2018
VAMatt said:
From 0 to 10, the middle number, 5, should be given for an average game. But, for this kind of thing to work, all games must be judged on the same scale. In other words, if crappy indy games can get a 5, then even a terrible AAA blockbuster will have to get a 9 or 10. So, we can't have any more of the "its good for what it is, so its gets a 7".

Yep it's moronic to give a 9/10 to a game "because it is a small game that plays fine"



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
Veknoid_Outcast on 07 January 2018
DonFerrari said:
5 instead of 7.5

We don’t agree often, but this is exactly my line of thinking :)

Currently, many mainstream critics treat 7.5 as the average, when it should be 5 (or 5.5 if 0 is out of the equation).



Cerebralbore101 on 07 January 2018
RolStoppable said:
5 should be the average.

1. Your argument ignores that a large number of bad games are skipped altogether. Due to the large number of game releases nowadays, only the more interesting games get reviewed. The exclusion of obvious stinkers pushes the average score of reviewed games above what the average score would be if all games got reviewed without exceptions.

2. If you put fitting in with Metacritic above being of service to your readers, then you have already fundamentally failed as a reviewer.

3. That's just stupid. A scale of 0-10 has a clearly defined floor and ceiling as opposed to the weight of humans.

The big flaw of using 7/10 as an average on a 10-point-scale is that it becomes hard to make distinctions between just above average games, good games, great games and all-time greats. Additionally, a large portion of the scale remains unused. The thinking that 7/10 should be used as the average is why it's hard to trust scores of 8/10; it might just be an average game that the reviewer liked something about, but now it has been elevated in the range where only good games should score. Conversely, you can have an anticipated game from an established IP that the reviewer was slightly disappointed with and it gets an 8/10 all the same.

1. What should count as a game though? Fan works? Flash games? Only games on the official e-shops of their respective consoles? Should there be a different average number per platform? Steam has way more shovelware than PSN, XBL, or the E-Shop.

2. What if most of your readers wind up finding you through metacritic? I'm not a fan of the site anymore, but there's no denying their effect on the industry. I sure wouldn't want a potential reader to glance at my metacritic blurb, and go "Wow, what a stupid site! He gave Fallout 4 a 6/10! He must have hated it!"

3. Yeah, using humans as my example doesn't work. I need to find something with a clearly defined floor and ceiling. Maybe vehicles allowed on U.S. highways would work? I mean regulators have probably put a set limit on both ends of the weight spectrum, for safety reasons. 



DonFerrari on 07 January 2018
Veknoid_Outcast said:
DonFerrari said:
5 instead of 7.5

We don’t agree often, but this is exactly my line of thinking :)

Currently, many mainstream critics treat 7.5 as the average, when it should be 5 (or 5.5 if 0 is out of the equation).

Well I guess we can agree every now and then.

And it comes to what OP pointed as one point... we have seem some good games rated as average (75-80, which should equate good) and bad games that are rated 65-70... the point system is very inflated...

In the end we have to go and consider that the scale starts on the 50 and that the 75 is for mixed/average... it's a little confusing.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

ArchangelMadzz on 07 January 2018

It should be 5.

It's not 5, but it should be.

1. Did they even try?
2. This is painful
3. mediocre
4. below average
5. nothing special but an okay time
6. pretty good, above average
7. great game had a great time
8. A must buy
9. Amazing, goty contender
10. I can't think of how this game could be any better, truly a staple of the generation.



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

Around the Network
Xen on 07 January 2018

5.

7/10 is obviously a good game with some flaws.

Rol has a good point about a large amount of games being ignored altogether, and this results in the "average" score creeping up, as the actual average game looks better compared to the bad one.

edit: just noticed VGPolyglot said something similar too...

Last edited by Xen - on 07 January 2018

Dr.Vita on 07 January 2018

5 or 6/10




Dr.Vita talks about Playstation Vita in 2016!
Playstation Vita Media Create Sales (2014 vs 2015 vs 2016)
Playstation Vita Japan Retail Software Sales (2013 vs 2014 vs 2015 + 2015 LTD Edition)
Prediction: Nothing will outsell PSP anymore (except Playstation home consoles)

flashfire926 on 07 January 2018

7/10 just screams a good but not great game. I just cant see 70% being average.

6 seems like the perfect middle ground to me, as 5 just screams "mediocre" to me (I know mediocre and average are basically the same thing, but idk)



Bet with Intrinsic:

The Switch will outsell 3DS (based on VGchartz numbers), according to me, while Intrinsic thinks the opposite will hold true. One month avatar control for the loser's avatar.

Dyllyo on 07 January 2018

It's funny because, by all means, 5 should be average. But I think of 7 as average. At least the games are playable then. I find anything lower than that is typically broken.



DonFerrari on 07 January 2018
ArchangelMadzz said:
It should be 5.

It's not 5, but it should be.

1. Did they even try?
2. This is painful
3. mediocre
4. below average
5. nothing special but an okay time
6. pretty good, above average
7. great game had a great time
8. A must buy
9. Amazing, goty contender
10. I can't think of how this game could be any better, truly a staple of the generation.

Good metric except maybe 6 and 7 that would still be a little better than average... but I can see why since you reserved 9 and 10 for exceptional cases and 8 is already quite high on your scale.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."