Why 70% is a good review score

ONM writes: When we post a review and give it a 70-79% review score, we often see comments from readers who think that it's a bad score. Take our LEGO Batman 2 review for earlier this year, for example. We gave it 78%, saying that fans will have a blast. Yet in the comments, we were accused of being hard on the LEGO games. That can't be right.

[NukaCola]

70% is a good score.

I don't know where the scoring system turned to:
100% = Must Buy
90% = Got to try
80% = It's ok
79% or below = FAILURE!!!

I personally think the numbers game needs to die alongside it the metacritic and unethical journalists.

[eagle21]

My whole thing is trying to make sure the controls and frames are solid. That usually breaks a game for me. And if the game is boring...FORGET ABOUT IT!! lol :)

[blitz0623]

Small Correction NukaCola:
<80 - FAILURE
81-90 - average
91-95 - good game
96-100 - overrated piece of crap

[I_am_Batman]

I don't even get why we need an article to explain that 70% score isn't bad. It all comes down to your own preferances. I wouldn't care for a 7/10 game if it's a WW2 Shooter for example (I really don't even care for 10/10 games sometimes). But if you like the setting and genre why shouldn't you give it a try.

Important thing to remember for the modern gamer:
Build your own opinion because it should be the only factor that decides if you're buying a game or not.

[guitarded77]

To me anything above a 9 is amazing, and there is no such thing as a perfect 10. I think anything 8-9 is great, 7-8 is good 6-7 is fair, 5-6 is mediocre, 4-5 is not enough budget, 4 and under is oops.

[deafdani]

@blitz0623: nice one, you made me laugh with the twist at the end. :P

[darthv72]

a 70% score on a game may end up being higher or lower to the individual based on their own appeal.

Scores used to be simple yet effective gauges to say whether or not something was worth looking into.

That was back when the main focus of a review was about the control, content, sound and graphics from a non bias view. Those reviews would generally save personal opinion for last.

Now it seems all reviews are filled with personal opinion from start to finish. As if the old way was boring and people wanted more of the sensationalized aspect instead of the standards that were once in place.

Kind of like the news nowadays. The phrasing and delivery are the focus instead of the story.

[NukaCola]

Another thing people don't see is a 75 for games on the metacritic is a yellow or mediocre. For film, their scores can fall down to 60 before they aren't green. People see the yellow and panic.

[LOGICWINS]

Love Rev3Games for this.

Buy It, Rent It, Forget It.

No numbers.

[Neckbear]

Who the hell are they to tell me what should I buy, rent or forget?

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

70% in itself is not bad, but the thing is the vast majority of games get 7/10. It's more common to 7/10 than it is to see 5/10(which is the real average), thus 7/10 is viewed as average by the public and anything below that number is seen as not worth a purchase.

[jmc8888]

Because people think it's like the American School Grading system.

Thus 70-79 = C = Average
60-69 = Below Average
50-59 = Fail

It's completely asinine, but many people are in school or just out of school so they gravitate towards that....wrongly.

Technically 50 is supposed to be middle of the road or average. Depending on how big a plus or minus you give average, you could say anything in the 40's is still basically average.

Bad games are supposed to be 39 or lower.

This is also why X-Play's original 5 star ranking (or that of movies) is superior, because it gets the ranking out of the 'grade system' and also makes it so you actually understand the difference. Each star means something, whereas each 10 point notch doesn't, and you have 10 of them, or even 100. In grading systems often less is more, and what we have in game ranking systems is too much so everything becomes subjective and ambiguous.

Metacritic isn't that bad, it just depends on HOW you use and interpret it. If you use it as a place to find aggregated info, it's quite good.

But to think the number it shows means something is quite different. You have people that over and under judge things. Since so many people think like the grading school system, most people will have things at 7-10 but if you hate on it and give 0's, it has twice the weight of a 10. Since a 10 will bring up a score around a 7 less than a 0 will bring it down. That's one reason why you get these 3-4's for some pretty good games, because so many people will give 0's. The numbers are a popularity contest.

But it's good because you get a bunch of user reviews, that often times tell you alot of detail that professional reviews don't say, and you'll find links to most online reviews in a convenient spot. So I don't wish metacritic die, I just think people need to learn how to use it correctly.

[LOGICWINS]

"Why 70% is a good review score"

Common sense. Anyone who has a basic understanding of the number system and ratios understands this.

[hellvaguy]

I agree. In school 70% was barely average by 1%. 80% is above average.

[coolbeans]

It seems like any game falling under the dreaded 75% (where the color code changes from green to yellow) on metacritic means practically everyone is going to outright ignore it.

[I_am_Batman]

Well I can only laugh at people like these. Just think about it. They are practically decide if they are going to get a game or not by looking at the color code of a score that mixes dozens of different peoples opinions together. I never got why people need to be told what to buy. I wish they would stop giving scores so that people would actually need to read the review to determine if they are interested in the game or not.

[jmc8888]

Look for specific things in comments, not an arbitrary score that means something different for every person.

It's not the score per se, it's that the system is flawed, we can make the scores be better, if the number of variations were smaller and taken out of the 'school grade' comparison.

Yet still any score is a shortcut from actual specifics of a game. It's best to read reviews, professional and user to determine if it has the aspects you like or find intriguing. Looking at pics and video....especially of actual gameplay. All these are much better tools than a score itself.

[Aclay]

I think it depends upon the game itself. For an established AAA franchise like Uncharted or Metal Gear Solid for example, an overwhelmingly majority reviews of 70 something isn't good at all. If it's just a few scores of 70 something amongst a sea of 8's and/or 9's, it's not a big deal IMO because there's always a couple of sites out there that score a game a little lower than most everyone else.

However, for a game or franchise that's not considered to be AAA like the Lego games, that aren't expected to have the same high production values, I agree that a 70-79 is a pretty good score.

[Canary]

But it's not a good score. By any metric. 70% is a C-. Slightly below average.

[TheFirstClassic]

A score on a test in school is not really equivilent to a review score of a product.

[jmc8888]

Exactly. This is what I'm talking about. People equate it with the school grading system. Thus it's not by 'any metric', you're (the guy above you) using a specific one, the American School Grading system...and it's not the only one.

The sad thing is, people's bonuses and salary are based off these things, which make it even more crazy. Alot of major decisions are based off a flawed construct.

[Canary]

Show me a single gaming site that reviews titles by percentages where 70% is a good score.

It doesn't happen, because 70% is not "good". At best, it can equate to "above average."

This doesn't mean that all games who achieve those ratings are necessarily judged accurately, but these scores have inherent meanings. The real issue here is that gamers shouldn't be so afraid of above-average or average scores... it's most certainly not that the entire rating system is flawed.

[TheFirstClassic]

I think the problem here is properly defining what is considered "good". When you ask me to show you one site where 70% is equal to a good score, what do you mean? Do you mean the users or the site itself?

Cause I can point out this site, or even ign actually where 70 is a good score. Just look right next to the number, anything from 7 to 7.9 is called "good" on ign's scale.

[Gran Canaria]

70% at school in the UK is an A. Or a first at university! At least it was in my day.