Onyxmeth said:
I like this method also, and only in single digit increments. 5=Amazing This allows the reviewer to express themselves through the written portion of the review and not use the numbering as a crutch, at least it should help in theory. This way also, 5 doesn't have to mean perfect. It just describes the cream of the crop, or upper echelon of games. |
A clear cut 1-5 rating is both good and bad. The good, it's clear cut, so it's a very stable way to review something. You can also have as much range as you want (3.45 if you really need it) so thats not an issue either.
The bad thing though, is that if you actually use only signel digits, well, that's kind of silly. To have only 5 degrees is VERY limiting. If you made a list of 20 games you considered as 5s, I'd bet that you would be able to pick out games in that list that are better/worse than others within that list. So they aren't all the SAME 5, they're all different 5s, which makes it VERY hard to trust that sort of system.
The bigger issue though is that it's TOO concrete. Reviewing is all relative, and that should be reflected in the system as well. To say the quality of average games today is the same as the quality of average games 15 years ago is silly. That's why reviews are raising up, since we all remember those games (those of us that aren't new to gaming, or incredibly young), and that influences reviews mildly enough to need the wiggle room that a non-concrete system gives.
