frankly it comes off as a little lazy to me, I appreciate when I can tell a gaming site, magazine, or individual reviewer took some time to really consider where they put a game. if someone I dig's opinion says a game is 6/10 I know it's mediocre but maybe worth a shot, 8 and up pretty solid. below 5 fairly miserable, etc. not digging their format. too simple
| TheGoldenBoy said: I wonder how many more sites will go this route in reviewing games. I think it's a good change since scores can be arbitrary. The text is always more important than the final number. |
I don't know, wouldn't you agree Metacritic as a combined aggregate of gaming /10 reviews generally is pretty accurate in terms of what you can expect with a games quality? if it's not broken, don't change it
| Skullwaker said: I like their new system! |
love your signature
Good i agree with the whole "reviews scores dont work anymore" statement, a recomendation segment would be bettter.
mountaindewslave said:
|
Nope, I'd disagree without reservation.
| mountaindewslave said:
I don't know, wouldn't you agree Metacritic as a combined aggregate of gaming /10 reviews generally is pretty accurate in terms of what you can expect with a games quality? if it's not broken, don't change it |
I would have to disagree. Too often has Metacritic counted scores from poor excuses of reviewers. Quarter To Three is a prime example of this. The other problem is that there is the subjectivity on giving a numerical score alone. One person's criteria for an 8/10 may be different from another person's criteria for the same score.
Burek said:
Not really. It's like the article itself says: There is no scale of 1-10. Today's games are graded on a 6-10 scale, where even a 74 is considered a total failure as it's colored yellow. And it has become commonplace to call crap every game that scored below 8/10. Of course, people like some on this forum like to use those scores to fuel their petty fan wars, but anybody who managed to read and comprehend the article can clearly deduce that the 1-10 scale without lower five grades is very detrimental to the industry, developers in particular... Because, to just put an ad that says 8/10 is no longer enough...your game needs to have at least 4.5 stars to be able to sell without a $50 million ad campaign. |
I disagree with this. this is entirely subjective from user to user. there are plenty of games that are under 8 rating wise that sell well. it's up to a person themselves not to freak out over the color yellow. I don't think anything is particular wrong with a 1-10 rating system, and if you think a 1-4 (or 1-5) whatever, rating system will be any better, it won't. the issue was never the numbers, it was the fact that people are extremely critical of the video game world (or really any entertainment, movies, music, etc.) and will always have a lot to say regarding comparisons and contrasting ratings from one game to the next
this will not magically change
Roronaa_chan said:
Nope, I'd disagree without reservation. |
name one game that you absolutely love or hate that is not somewhere near accurate in terms of its Meta rating? I'm just saying, I am a pretty serious gamer and generally if a game on there has positive ratings I enjoy it, and if it doesn't I don't (even though I still play many). It's not always correct because naturally everyone enjoys different things, but I've never searched a game I hated and been confused when I saw high ratings for it on there (well maybe besides recently Dragon Age Inquistion)
I think people around here are relating their dislike for the competition and constant comparisons and negative attitudes regarding games and the rating system.
whether it's 1-4 (like Eurogamer seems to be going for in other terms), 1-10, whatever, it is the same exact ordeal just painted in a different light
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
