HoloDust on 09 January 2018
| Cerebralbore101 said: Soooo after reviewing the results of the thread I noticed two things. 1. Most people agree that 5 should be the number assigned to an average game. 2. A game that gets a 5 is not worth buying. Or to use Rol's argument: Most of the bad games are not reviewed and that drives the average review score up. If all games were reviewed the average review score would be 5, not 7. ^^^This argument implies that your average game is not worth buying. A lot of what other people said, in the thread, echoed this. I'd quote them, but I'm lazy and hate doing multi-quote responses. |
5 sits right in the middle of the scale - it pretty much implies that game has about the same amount of good and bad in it...or "A near-equal balance of good and bad that can make a game either fall disappointingly short of its evident potential or be mildly entertaining despite its many failings."...or "Take it or leave it".
3 out of 5 stars or 6/10 is usally first tier of decent game that manages to have more good than bad stuff.
That sad, reviews can be quite subjective, especially when it come to more niche genres reviewed by mainstream sites...or occasionally downright iditioc ones, like Eurogamer or Polygon.
