My problem with review scores

[ReimTime]

tokilamockingbrd said:

Captain_Yuri said:

I feel like the review system is using the school system of grading where 50 or below is a failure and 70 is considered good/average and etc so if you adjust ur scoring like that... Reviews suddenly work and make sense so I don't think there is anything wrong with it

Also, metacritic averages the reviews out from the blind to the haters (if you know what I mean) so the place where it will land should be the consensus is hence why I think metacritic is great

(Sorry for the fail grammer/editing, I am tired today T_T)

this.

OP uses 50 as the "average" then he uses a comparison to school grades where a 50 is a good hard F. I have no issue with a 60 being a bad score and anything below terrible. The review system like Captain Yuri stated is baded of the ABCDF scale we all know from school.

A- through A+ = 90-100

B- through B+ = 80-89

C- through C+ = 70-79

D- through D+ = 60-69

Anything below a 60 is an F.  Ya a 55 is better than a 25 score but you still dont want it either way. D game does something right and it is the stuff you like you might try it. A C game does alot right but have a bunch of minor flaws or a few big ones. B games do just about everything right but does is just a little off in a few areas. Once you get over 90 its a mater of ticky tack stuff. Maybe one minor flaw keeps a game at low 90s as opposed to mid 90s.

No, my analogy was University bell-curve grading, where the pass/fail mark is not static. Your place above/below the average is dependent on the state of everyone else's place. I posted that as an analogy to get more discussion, but when I talk about it more, an archetypal/baseline game to compare others to would be a good idea.