True, and the letter system is too open to interpretation.

This is the problem with it... people think it matters.... it's not an "error of 20%" because the score is already based on opinion.

If a game here was scored 5 stars out of 5.... that's it... that's all you need to know about the score (though you should read the review) you shouldn't be trying to compare it to other reviews or saying "well that could be anything from 80-100%" A review and the score should be there to help you decide whether you want to buy (or rent) a game or not, with the 100 point scale it only hinders gamers ability to understand what games are good and what are not.

If two game that interest you are reviewed and both get 4 stars/5, you would then be encouraged to read the review to find out what aspects of which game interest you the most.

I two games that interest you are reviewed and are given scores 7.5 and 8.5 you would not be encouraged to read the review because it would have made your mind up for you, even though if you read the review you might find somthing in that 8.5 game that you would not like in the game, but the reviewer saw little problem with.

Fair point, but gears of war 2 and resistance 2 both got a few 4/5 scores so therefore they are saying they are both as good, but if it was out of 100 of even out of 10 it would have given a far more accurate account of which game they think is truly better.

Fair point, but gears of war 2 and resistance 2 both got a few 4/5 scores so therefore they are saying they are both as good, but if it was out of 100 or even out of 10 it would have given a far more accurate account of which game they think is truly better.

 Or it is saying each game is very enjoyable and both worth being looked at by owners of the system.

And not a question of which one is better

Therein lies your problem,it's what "they think".... and why should they know which of two similar games you will prefer.

It's not a question of accuracy because the scores can't accurately portray major aspects of the game.... that's why people should be reading the reviews rather than only checking the scores.

This 100 point scale is partially what is to blame for this review "inflation" that is happening, where people expect 70% games to be sub-par, and then reviewers rate sub-par games at higher and higher scores, which in turn makes gamers expect even higher scored games to be sub-par.

 Ok , resistance v gears was a bad example due to them been on rival systems

Fact for me is that the 5/5 system is the worse rating systen there is out there

apart from the rare few reviewers who are problably not even proper gamers giving scores out of 4 lol, you know, newspaper reviewers ect, a 25% margin for error, come on , that aint right lol

I hear what your saying, but reviews without scores can be misleading aswell at times, the particular person reviewing the game could tell you about some great aspects of the game but when you the consumer get round to playing it you may totally disagree with what he was saying.

Scores are for bragging rights but can also give you a rough idea of just how good a game in a particular genre is.

It's not a margin of error.... reviews are not mathematical calculations

As I said in my last post.... it doesn't matter how accurate you go, the score cannot tell you what is in the game, the score doesn't increase by 2% because an online option is added or because a certain weapon feels great, and even if that were the case somone looking at the score can't determine whether a 2% has been added for online or not..... thus the rating should only be there as an incentive to read the review (or as a guard to stay away from a game).... and a 5/5 scale is much better at doing that.