Ka-pi96 said:
HoloDust said:
I'm not sure how it's handled on Metacritic, but I (mostly) see this as what star system translates into:
no star = 00-05; ½ = 06-15; ★ = 16-25; ★½ = 26-35; ★★ = 36-45; ★★½ = 46-55; ★★★ = 56-65; ★★★½ = 66-75; ★★★★ = 76-85; ★★★★½ = 86-95; ★★★★★ = 96-100
Alternatively:
no star = 00-04; ½ = 05-14; ★ = 15-24; ★½ = 25-34; ★★ = 35-44; ★★½ = 45-54; ★★★ = 55-64; ★★★½ = 65-74; ★★★★ = 75-84; ★★★★½ = 85-94; ★★★★★ = 95-100
As a P&C adventure fan, I frequent Adventuregamers.com since late 90s and they use 5 star system - when I see ★★★½ that is definitely something that is on my radar, and often I'll play ★★★ - sometimes I'll even try out ★★½ game. So, at least in my head, 5 star system is much more balanced than 0-10 or 00-100.
|
But... that is 0-10?
If you're using half stars as well then there's exactly 10 different ratings it could receive, the exact same as in a numbered 0-10.
|
Not really - it's 0-5 with halfsteps. In the sense that 3.5 is still 3, but with that extra half. If you convert that to 0-10 it would not be 6 with extra 1, but 7 - not sure if I'm making sense here. For me, i.e. 0-5 star system always implied that if something is, say, 3.8, it will be rated as 4 - so there is sort of a range in star system - 4 star game would translate into 75-84 range, which I like more then "this game is 80/100".
Personal preference really.
