So does cubed3 thinks rounding 9.9 equals 9, or did they adjust the review?

[kn]

TheRealMafoo said:

kn said:

TheRealMafoo said:
a 9.9 in a lot of reviewers eyes, is more then .1 less then a 10. my guess, is the reason they gave it a 9.9 in the first place was because they wanted to give it the best score that's not a 10.

They changed there ranking system, and it still has the best score that's not a 10.

Question though: Why do you care?

I can't put words in his mouth about why he cares but I'll add my opinion where it wasn't asked for. I haven't played Ocarina nor do I care to. I'm not a Zelda fan to begin with so it is pointless. I do hate one thing in life with a passion, though -- and that is revisionist history. If the game scored a 9.9, it should be a 10 in their new system. If this were happening to GTAIV instead of Ocarina, the internet blogs would be ablaze with accusations of bias, payoff, fanboyisms, etc.

It wasn't a 10 for them then, why should it be a 10 now? I am sure the reviewer thought to himself "Wow, this game is perfect, other then this one thing I must ding it for".

That one thing is still there, so he would still ding the game for it, and give it the best score posable that's does not mean "perfect".

I don't care where games rank, but if you want to be fair about it all, giving it a 9 if you are on a whole point system, seems to better reperasent what the origonal reviewer meant then giving it a 10.

 Perhaps so, but that "one thing" that kept it from being a 10 was a 1% ding.  Now it is a 10% hit.  Was that one thing a reason to dock the game 10% of the overall score?  They should have left well enough alone and just revised going forward instead of doing it in arrears.  One thing is certain, however, and that is they got their site in the headlines in a big way.  I've never been to their site and I suspect the vast majority of VGC members have not, either.  They certainly are better known now...  possible mission accomplished?