AshKetchum1992 said:
Scoobes said:
Mr Khan said:
Scoobes said:
OK, I've adopted (or shamelessly stolen depending on your POV) MrKhans' scoring system. It's actually fairly close to my old ranking with a few major exceptions e.g. AC2 is a lot higher than I placed before and MGS1 seems to be a lot lower than I expected. A few more but I'll save them for list time.
It was actually a lot of fun, I could do my top 100 now, lol. |
I like it because i think it controls for the various factors that often undermine these lists: it balances rose-tinted glasses with the fact that some games, even if they are objectively worse than others (like the badly unbalanced Mario Kart 64 vs much more polished Double Dash, Wii, and 7) are still more significant to your gaming history. How much did you love it back then? How has that love held up? And objectively (as far as game judging can be objective) how good is the game, actually? That helps to keep more roughly-designed games in check, without rewarding games that you can't find any flaws in, but also didn't really "love" either.
|
I completely agree. It balances objective game mechanics with the effect the game has subjectively had on you. I can see why MGS dropped a few places (Modern score of PS1/N64 games are relatively low) and I'm OK with that.
I pretty much copied your scoring system with a few minor changes to the way I score them. If anyone else wants to adopt it or something similar:
Original score: Score I would give the game when I first played it.
Modern score: If I play the game now, what would I give it?
Nostalgia: How fondly do I remember the game when I think of it and how much did it influence me?
Length value: How much did I personally play the game? Will I be going back to it in the future?
I then took an average (all scores out of 10).
|
Can I also use this system?, it's pretty good
And I've given a bump to this topic :P
|
I don't see why not. It's a good system.
