ItsaMii said:
Let me try to be more clear on this issue. The more promiscuous game reviewers rarelly hand out a 10. You don`t need more than 2 hands to count all the 10`s from big name sites or magazine - like EGM, 1up, Gamespot, IGN. I am not familiar with movie reviews, but I would bet all my VGchartz money that among movies with a 70 metascores there isn`t even a single 10 review. My point is that if you want to use a 10 point scale review system, then you must give 10`s every now and then. If 10`s were not taboo the highest rating would not be in the low 9`s. It is like a tourney where you can only go as high as 2nd place because there is always someone better than you or no one is "perfect". That "there is no perfect game vision" is part of the problem. Remember the GTA 4 scores? They make a lot of sense in a objective approach. All the other GTA`s (as shitty as they were) scored among 90 and 95. GTA 4 improved in almost every aspect (debatable I know, but driving/shooting is much tighter and the plot is better). So why can`t it score a 10? Simple, because these retarded reviewers have been telling us that there is no perfect game for decades. GTA 4 scoring so many 10`s is more of a insult to more revolutionary games deserving higher scores than a GTA 4 not deserving the score. When a 10 is so hard to achieve we end up with that insulting top 20 games of all time on gamerankings. How can the Orange box score higher than Half Life 2? I know it is the best bargain for a game you will ever have, but that would be as stupid as scoring the Star Wars first trilogy box higher than the original Star Wars. Another issue is that there are no games in the top 20 that came before 32 bit generation. Comparing to the movies reviews, it would be like LOR trilogy and X-men the Movie scoring higher than Citizen Kane, Godfather and Schindler list. That show us how far games are from being art ... at least from the gaming press perspective. |
You make a point though I do disagree. I've been doing reviews since 2003. I reviewed between 45-50 titles since then which is roughly 10 games a year and have not yet given a single 10. In fact if I look back at the short lifespan of our industry there are only a handful of games I could earnestly give that perfect 10 score to. Super Mario Bros, Super Mario World, Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Goldeneye007 and *possibly* Final Fantasy VI (or III) & Mario RPG. Though all those titles are on Nintendo systems, I do own and play games on every single system and enjoy each.
The last game I would award a perfect 10 is from 1998. While all those are obviously astounding games only 3 of them would appear on my personal top 20 list, though I do not want to go in depth as to the reasons why I would give them 10's since that isn't the topic of this thread.
The reason why I don't see any game fit for a perfect score in over a decade? Because it's become much more difficult to review games impartially then it was 10 years ago. Now we have to evaluate storylines which were non present in the old school days, tiny subtleties in graphics and art direction, increasingly complicated gameplay and controls. Presentation. Writing, and most presently have to take into account the unique motion controls of the Wii and DS.
There's a whole host of other aspects no body had to deal with in the early to mid ninties. While many games still excell in certain elements from gameplay (GTA VC) to storyline (MGS series) none of them blend in all these aspects into a single flawless package. The industry is driven by such a powerful engine of innovation that something cutting edge 5 years ago instantly becomes obsolete today and reviewers are forced to re-evaluate and adapt their reviews to fit more with the standards and expectations of the current era.
Movies do not have these issues to deal with as the standards have been largely established several decades ago.
