Explain how you rate games and your reasoning behind the scoring.

[Veknoid_Outcast]

HoloDust said:

Veknoid_Outcast said:

So, is it fair to say that the allure of the star system is more that it represents a time when score inflation wasn't such a problem? Because then it starts to make sense. Otherwise, I remain very confused.

I can't speak for the others, but for me that's the part of it - these days on Adventure Gamers, 4, 4^1/2 and 5 stars are handed very generously and you hardly ever see game rated under 3 stars - which is ridiculous. This was much, much different in golden age of P&C adventure games, when full scale was used, unlike how it is now (well, that, unfortunately, has been going on for many years). So, in my head it's very clear what 3 stars means, and that is not (although technically it is) same as 60/100 on Meta, given how idiotic that scoring scale has become in practicality ditching half a scale (which would be fixed to a degree if Meta used same scale for games as they do for for films).

I understand if it confuses you, but here's an example:

I rated BotW

Is that perceptively same for you as:

7/10

or

I think this conundrum might have much to do with that yellow for 70 on META meaning "Mixed Reviews"

Compare that to

also on META, but for films/TV/music, which is same score, but falls into "Generally favorable" category

I'm definitely hearing you.

For me, your 3.5 is identical to the 7 and the 70. I don't have any issue making the conversion.

But I understand where you're coming from. Score inflation is a problem, and I'm sad to say some outlets and fans have abandoned the full scale, using 5/10 as the low end and 10/10 as the high end. I also agree the yellow 70 is a mistake on Metacritic's part.

If this conversation is about how people are using (or misusing) the 10-point scale, and not about how the scale is inherently different from the five-star-with-half-stars scale, then I begin to understand. Although, to be fair, any scale can be abused.