| Khuutra said: "Value" isn't necessarily something that's going to mean the same thing for every reviewer, Reasonable. Or even every review by the same reviewer. It means what the word means - each of us holds different values in what makes a game worth playing. |
That's exactly why you shouldn't be using it. For the very reason (which I'm betting you can guess I agree with 1000%) you state it falls apart when you have different people assigning a number to it. Essentially a 6 for Value for game X means nothing next to the 7 for Game Y... the problem is scores have to have some level of consistency if you're going to use them.
A review should indicate the length of a game, any repeatability, the quality of the experience, etc. and the reader needs to decide for themselves whether that implies enough value for them - I know you can't please everyone, but its clear to me from your and Nazna's comments that the scores in general, and Value in particular, do not make sense as applied currently.
You can't have a score mechanism that is open to individual interpretation with every title - it simply undermines the whole point of a score.
The more I think about it (repeating some feedback from a moment ago) I would advice a single score or no score at all.
Score's are for whimps and people who can't be bothered reading anway! If you care enough to check out a review then focus on the content, not an arbritary score.
Again, pls see this as constructive - I'm not whining, etc. but I really believe there is a flaw here you could catch early and fix.
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
