| UUDDLRLRBA Multiplatform Gaming http://uuddlrlrba.co.uk/forum/ |
|
| Number Scoring, should it still exist? http://uuddlrlrba.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=7178 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Raiku [ Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
After seeing how Obsidian lost a bonus over one point on Metacritic it got me thinking, should we just get rid of scoring on reviews and just go with a final word type thing or should we just keep it? |
|
| Author: | Smokey [ Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
Using a numbered score system has a place, I think, but this idea that's stuck in people's heads that a game is bad if it gets an 8 or lower needs to go to hell where it belongs. If you're going to use a scale of 1-10, you need to use it properly, with 5 being average. Secondly, there needs to be a legitimate standard that reviewers adhere to when they assign a score. I like the idea that was put forward in a Power Button podcast not too long ago where the most respected figures in game journalism form a panel, hammer this stuff, and actually make the individual reviewer explain why he gave a specific game a certain score, and if the reviewer doesn't explain himself satisfactorily, the review is seen as aberrant and shouldn't be taken seriously. If you want to hear the idea put forth in its entirety, check this out, and if you don't want to hear anything about Saints Row the Third or THQ, skip to about 20 mins to the end. |
|
| Author: | DoFuss [ Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
Dont get me started on this, having the discussion with one of my editors. Its so hard to use properly as a smaller site, but they are useful. I dont always want to read a review, often I just want an idea of if its ass backwards. anything below a 7... 6 if the concept really intrigues me I get. Unless its in Edge or GamesTM at which point a 5 is fine. |
|
| Author: | Raiku [ Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
Smokey wrote: Using a numbered score system has a place, I think, but this idea that's stuck in people's heads that a game is bad if it gets an 8 or lower needs to go to hell where it belongs. If you're going to use a scale of 1-10, you need to use it properly, with 5 being average. Secondly, there needs to be a legitimate standard that reviewers adhere to when they assign a score. I like the idea that was put forward in a Power Button podcast not too long ago where the most respected figures in game journalism form a panel, hammer this stuff, and actually make the individual reviewer explain why he gave a specific game a certain score, and if the reviewer doesn't explain himself satisfactorily, the review is seen as aberrant and shouldn't be taken seriously. If you want to hear the idea put forth in its entirety, check this out, and if you don't want to hear anything about Saints Row the Third or THQ, skip to about 20 mins to the end. Thats actually not a bad idea. It might get people who go "It's a *insert genre here* therefore its bad." to punish them for acting like that. But will it stop them from giving bad reviews? |
|
| Author: | bill goat [ Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
simply because some sites see 5 star and 10/10 as 100% |
|
| Author: | DoFuss [ Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
The problem you have is that lot of games that would be 1 arent reviewed. A game I played... I am alone i think it was called... was dreadful, but as it was never reviewed we dont see when the 1s appear. As long as a site is consistent that is all you can ask but the idea of a standard is impossible. NOTHING else with creative elements is reviewed to a standard. Look at a game like deadly premonition, reviews were split because of opinion. Seeing the seed of an idea, overlooking flaws in execution. Or a title that has deliberately broken elements, i would say like Mirror Edge, to force a style of play. They would lose marks in a standardised scale due to mechanical faults. Not, scores are there as a short hand to the reviewer opinion. The opinion should be supported by the review of course, but the idea this can somehow be boiled down to a science is ludicrous. |
|
| Author: | Torez [ Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
The problem is that even if it was decided that no-number is better, there's no way to dictate to reviewers how to review games. Number reviews will always exist because when you tell someone a game is good or bad, they always ask "how good?" or "how bad?". A number score is the quickest and easiest way to get this across, although clearly anyone who plans on buying a game should get more details on the game than just the number score. I'm gonna have to disagree with you on the whole panel idea smokey. I don't think it is a good idea to ignore "aberrant" reviews. Not every gamer is the same and not every gamer adheres to the mainstream ideals of what makes games good and bad. It's completely possible to play a game that most reviewers say is mediocre and love it. It's also completely possible to play a game that the gaming press creamed themselves over and completely hate it. A reviewer doesn't have to explain his reasoning to a panel because that is what his review is for. Just because his experience with the game is not the majority's experience is no reason to dis-count his review. It simply is not possible to write an unbiased review. It is possible to write a rationale review looking at the game objectively and carefully weighing the pros and cons; graphics, sounds, presentation, etc -- but in the end a review is always heavily influenced by whether the game was enjoyable to the reviewer. |
|
| Author: | Smokey [ Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
Okay, I misspoke. I should have said "uninformed" rather than "aberrant". I really think a panel of respected game journalists would prevent incidents like the Eurogamer freelancer that totally screwed Darkfall by lying about how much time he'd spent in the game when he'd barely gotten out of the character creator. If he'd had to have his review vetted and picked apart by independent sources before it was published, that whole scandal never would have happened. Basically, it would ensure that reviewers did their jobs properly as well as giving the public some peace of mind that, if it has the panel's seal of approval, it's the real deal. |
|
| Author: | Torez [ Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
Okay then I agree with that. Reviewers do need to be informed about the games they review. |
|
| Author: | Blokeymon [ Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
1-100 or 100% = yes. 1-10 = no. |
|
| Author: | DoFuss [ Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
Torez wrote: Okay then I agree with that. Reviewers do need to be informed about the games they review. I like to think that goes without saying. I like a 2 scale review, buy it - yes or no… maybe 3. No, Maybe, Yes. |
|
| Author: | Smokey [ Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
Blokeymon wrote: 1-100 or 100% = yes. 1-10 = no. Well, then you might as well encourage all the nitpicky "Y U GIVE THIS 9.4 N NOT 9.5 UR A FAG GO DAI" retards to flock to your comment section and shit all over it, because the only difference there is that their arguing over whole numbers instead of fractions. |
|
| Author: | Blokeymon [ Fri Mar 16, 2012 8:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
Smokey wrote: Blokeymon wrote: 1-100 or 100% = yes. 1-10 = no. Well, then you might as well encourage all the nitpicky "Y U GIVE THIS 9.4 N NOT 9.5 UR A FAG GO DAI" retards to flock to your comment section and shit all over it, because the only difference there is that their arguing over whole numbers instead of fractions. A person may be clever, but people are stupid. Give a single person a 9.4 and they'll see a near perfect game. Give people a 9.4, and they'll collectively complain that its obviously dogshit. Come at me brah. |
|
| Author: | HGW XX/7 [ Fri Mar 16, 2012 8:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
The biggest problem with actual review scores, is that people have a tendency to compare that score to games that are ENTIRELY DIFFERENT. Each score should stand on its own without being compared to other games, because really, what the hell is the point in that? You're reviewing a specific game, not comparing it to every game that came before it and will follow. Therefor, you should be reviewing that game solely on it's merits and what it contains rather than, "Well, this was good, but in Call of Duty THIS happens, and that's, like, so much better." It's called a review, not a comparison. The problem lies moreso with the people who demand a number score as some sort of stupid validation, but the reviewers themselves aren't free from flak regarding it. |
|
| Author: | Torez [ Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Number Scoring, should it still exist? |
Very true. Skyrim may have a high rating but if you're not into RPGs then that score means nothing to you. You also can't compare scores with old games and new games. Ocarina of Time got 10/10 all over the place when it came out, but if it's 1996 form was released today as Nintendo's latest console Zelda it would be a massive shitstorm of bad reviews. That's what always bothered me about reviews. Reviews have a shelf life. As a game begins to show its age in graphics, sound, controls, etc. the reviews become less and less relevant to contemporary gamers. There's really nothing that can be done about it. Even when an old game is re-released on virtual console or live arcade or whatever, you get two kinds of reviews: the reviews that take into account the classic nature of the game and the nostalgia factor, and the reviews that look at the game purely by modern standards for modern gamers. You get a very wide range of scores and yet both styles of review are valid. Usually when I look at reviews now I look at technical factors; graphics, sound, whether there are glitches, length of the game, stuff like that. I've realized at this point that there's really no way for me to know if I will like a certain game until I play it. If a game has serious flaws in the way it was made I will avoid it. Then there's certain genres that I've learned from experience that I can't get into (although I try to remain open to them, and occasionally find games that I love). Other than that it's a crapshoot. You can give me two shooters of the same sub-genre, both with average scores of 9.0, but there's no guarantee I will like or dislike either one until I play them. It's no different than reading movie reviews or music reviews. Unless they bring to light glaring technical flaws, they're pretty much worthless unless the reviewer is a carbon copy of you. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|