By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Review Inflation

Reasonable on 04 November 2009
Onyxmeth said:
forest-spirit said:
Onyxmeth said:

One more thing that bothers me, but this is only about certain sites, including this one. I hate individually scoring each category and then creating a wacko score based on the three that isn't even averaged out. If you're going to go through the trouble of diving in so deep into every aspect of a title like gameplay, replay value, sound, graphics, etc. then why not let the user decide what is important?

Individualize the scoring. Let's say I use this scoring, based on IGN's scoring system:

Wii Fit

Presentation 7.0
Graphics 5.0
Sound 6.0
Gameplay 8.0
Lasting Appeal 9.0

Final Score 8.0

Now not only is this not an average, but some might even say they're not valuing the final score correctly because this is a fitness game and some things just shouldn't count for much. Why not have a cool little interactive review system? Each category is individually weighted by a percentage out of 100 which would be individual to the reviewer based on whatever genre he is reviewing. This in turn, accompanied by the numbers creates an actual average score, albeit a weighted one. You then allow the user to adjust the value of each category and recalculate the scoring themselves based on their own ideals. Don't care about graphics and sound in your fitness game? Put their weight to the average at 0. Care most about the gameplay and lasting appeal? Give them a heavy weight in the average. Press enter and see a new score pop up that works for you, the individual.

Allow all your saved scoring go under a profile so it can be saved for you, and allow yourself to return to the default score if you so wish. I think it's a novel idea. It wouldn't fix some of the earlier problems, but it would be a hell of a lot of fun to use, and may help you better at making purchases.

A search engine to find games based on their individual category scoring couldn't hurt either. Want to see only the 360 games that have a gameplay rating of 9.0 or above? Bam, a new list for you ignoring final scoring to help you find games based on a category that interests you.

 

I think this would be a fantastic system.

Of course it's a fantastic system. All the shit that comes out of my mouth turns to gold.

What about your other end? 

That sounds pretty interesting, although in truth, if you know what you like, can read, and are willing to use your brain a little, you should be able to judge pretty well what you think.

I agree though, I just puzzle over the individual scores that then get ignored.  The other issue is that the category is in flux as specs and standards change, yesterday's great graphics are today's average ones, for example, but hopefully good gameplay remains good gameplay.

Personally, I've decided I want scores dropped (screw the lazy can't be bothered to read generation) well written reviews and at the end, where it says SCORE I want it to then say JUDGE FOR YOURSELF.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Around the Network
Kasz216 on 04 November 2009

See I like keeping the scores. I don't actually use the scores for anything...

but doing so lets me know on Metacritic (more or less) which reviewers liked the game most. Which liked it least.

Whenever there is a game i want to buy i'm iffy on I pick the top 3 metacritic and bottom 3 metacritic reviews and read them to see what the strengths and weaknesses are.

 

What i find ironic is.... 9 times out of 10 the top and bottom reviews list pretty much all the same positives and negatives, and just give them varying levels of importance.

 

The difference between a 90 and a 60 could be so little as.... nothing but the reviewer.  So honestly i don't think they review games as software either.  They just don't review games in general.  They just say "Hey what do I think about this product."

While software reviewers tend to think "Hey what will people think about this product."  At least in software reviews they consider the likes and dislikes and whats important to the average customer... even if it's technical use.

While vidoegames... it's just one guys opinion about his expierence... which in the end is relatable to nobody.



Onyxmeth on 04 November 2009
Reasonable said:
Onyxmeth said:

Of course it's a fantastic system. All the shit that comes out of my mouth turns to gold.

What about your other end? 

The shit that comes out of the other end doesn't turn into anything. However, it does smell like roses.



Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.



Reasonable on 04 November 2009
Onyxmeth said:
Reasonable said:
Onyxmeth said:
 

Of course it's a fantastic system. All the shit that comes out of my mouth turns to gold.

What about your other end? 

The shit that comes out of the other end doesn't turn into anything. However, it does smell like roses.

Man, you're damn near perfect! 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

loves2splooge on 04 November 2009

I'm not happy with review score inflation either. It's mindboggling when I see a game get a high 70 even though it was very clear that the reviewer didn't actually have fun with the game. I think "average" should be no higher than 65 (which is the equivalent of a C grade in school, which is average) , no lower than 50 (mid point). Personally I lean more to making 50 the average. That is the midpoint between 1 to 100. This isn't school where you can't go failing half the class (unless your instructor is a real jerk. lol), that's why 65 is the average norm in school as opposed to 50. But when you see reviewers make 75 or whatever it is the new average, that's just bs. Reviewers are too afraid of angering game devs by giving them a low grade because they depend on game companies for advertising revenue. Pretty corrupt system. This is how it should be:

0-9 Epic Fail

10-19 Horrible

21-29 Poor

31-39 Weak

41-49 Needs Improvement

50-59 Mediocre/Average

60-69 Decent

70-79 Good

80-89 Great

90-99 1337



Around the Network
Slimebeast on 04 November 2009

In this thread axumblade breaks the myth about inflated review scores:
http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=91272

axumblade said:
routsounmanman said:
Too many 90+ this gen...

Actually....Looking at metacritic (i know right...)

Gamecube had 26  games at 90 or above, while the Wii only has 9. Xbox had 32 games at 90 or above whereas the 360 has only 24. And of course the 63 PS2 games that were 90 or above tramples the 15 for the PS3.

Last generation had 121 games at 90 or above. We have still only 48 games this generation at 90 or above. So in order for it to reach that number from last generation 73 more games need to hit 90 over the next few years.

 



Kenryoku_Maxis on 04 November 2009
Slimebeast said:

In this thread axumblade breaks the myth about inflated review scores:
http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=91272

axumblade said:
routsounmanman said:
Too many 90+ this gen...

Actually....Looking at metacritic (i know right...)

Gamecube had 26  games at 90 or above, while the Wii only has 9. Xbox had 32 games at 90 or above whereas the 360 has only 24. And of course the 63 PS2 games that were 90 or above tramples the 15 for the PS3.

Last generation had 121 games at 90 or above. We have still only 48 games this generation at 90 or above. So in order for it to reach that number from last generation 73 more games need to hit 90 over the next few years.

 

I do want to mention that, at least in my view, the 'inflation of review scores' started halfway through last gen.  And most of the inflated scores came near the end of last gen.

Ignoring that completely however, we're not even done with this generation.  And a lot of what could be keeping that score down is there's simply no console this gen that is a 'PS2'.  No one console is going to generate so much attention that its going to garner so much uniform positive attention (aka positive bias) from reviewers.  Instead, reviewers are having to often review the same game on two different consoles (360/PS3) and then have a whole different rating system for Wii games.

In any event, I don't think just adding up all the totals of review scores disproves their inflation of scores.  That's like saying judges at figure skating contests don't lower certain contestants scores simply because they add up all the scores at the end to make an avg.



Six upcoming games you should look into:

 

  

Slimebeast on 04 November 2009
Kenryoku_Maxis said:
Slimebeast said:

In this thread axumblade breaks the myth about inflated review scores:
http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=91272

axumblade said:
routsounmanman said:
Too many 90+ this gen...

Actually....Looking at metacritic (i know right...)

Gamecube had 26  games at 90 or above, while the Wii only has 9. Xbox had 32 games at 90 or above whereas the 360 has only 24. And of course the 63 PS2 games that were 90 or above tramples the 15 for the PS3.

Last generation had 121 games at 90 or above. We have still only 48 games this generation at 90 or above. So in order for it to reach that number from last generation 73 more games need to hit 90 over the next few years.

 

I do want to mention that, at least in my view, the 'inflation of review scores' started halfway through last gen.  And most of the inflated scores came near the end of last gen.

Ignoring that completely however, we're not even done with this generation.  And a lot of what could be keeping that score down is there's simply no console this gen that is a 'PS2'.  No one console is going to generate so much attention that its going to garner so much uniform positive attention (aka positive bias) from reviewers.  Instead, reviewers are having to often review the same game on two different consoles (360/PS3) and then have a whole different rating system for Wii games.

In any event, I don't think just adding up all the totals of review scores disproves their inflation of scores.  That's like saying judges at figure skating contests don't lower certain contestants scores simply because they add up all the scores at the end to make an avg.

What's a better method then to prove rather than just speculate?



MontanaHatchet on 04 November 2009

Actually, I think the main problem with reviews is the people reading them.

I think the people who read reviews take them so freakin' literally that they can't just say "this game is good, this game is bad." They have to over-complicate and over-analyze it, and then just bitch when the scale seems odd to them. And additionally, people don't read reviews for the content or for a differing opinion. Most people read reviews just so that they can agree with them or feel good about their favorite game.

The reviewers need work, but so do the readers. A lot.



 

 

Xoj on 04 November 2009
Khuutra said:
Onyxmeth, would you say that the ideal scoring system - at least in theory - would be to drop a scoring system altogether?

u get grades in school.

depends in who does the scoring i guess, but dropping the score system would only benefit the mediocre or average.

the ones at the top deserve to be there and by no means doens't mean if a game it's popular should be grade higher.