While the 10-point scale is still the most commonly used method of rating video games, many say the system is – to some extent – broken.
The author of this article mentions at the end how a 5 star system could replace the 1-10 scale that's used for gaming now since they only use "5" numbers anyways. I would like to point out that yes, they may use 5 numbers really when reviewing but I do not think a star system would change anything. The author mentions how every 1-10 scale is different for reviewers, like 8 might be great for one while 8 can be ok to another. The star system would not change that fact, sure it'll be reviewed pretty much the same as movies, restaurants etc.. but the fact that video games are really expansive you really have to take into account that 4 stars by one reviewer can still mean something completely different than the other reviewer who put 4 stars. ~ Side note 1-10 scale would not be eliminated with the 5 star system since most reviewers usually give half a star anyways so it still adds up to 10 anyways.
The only way to solve the broken scale* is to drop it entirely. This is because it would take too much time / effort to get every site (or even just the ones on Metacritic) to agree to a universal system (some reviewers are subjective like Quarter to Three, which greatly impacts how the review is done), then agree to a universal grading scale where X means X and there is no debate on that matter and then get every reviewer to agree to this system. I know the last one sounds silly, but a lot of sites will outright tell you what the scores mean, but this means nothing if the writers don't follow the system and trust me, a lot of people don't follow the system. Anyway, the score system needs to go because I've read countless reviews where the score and the review contradict one another. My favorite example of this is the IGN review of Plants vs Zombies Garden Warfare ( http://www.ign.com/articles... ), where the review itself is quite positive and the ONLY negative listed is "limited split-screen" against 4 positive notes, yet the game only scored a 7.8. Even after rereading it a number of times (I commonly use it as an example), I still don't quite understand where the missing 2.2 points went and that shouldn't happen in a review, much less one from a large source like IGN. * I say scale because if you do .5's with a 5 point scale, then it's still a 10 point scale and if you do decimal points with a 10 point scale, then it can be anywhere from 20 to 100.
Since the view of a game is mostly subjective, this scale will always be broken. I know people who love Skyrim to the point where they have lost their jobs over it. But to me...it's just a game that rates about a 5 on my enjoyment level. However, I love the crap out of Pikman 3, but I know it is not everyone's cup of tea. Game reviews and scores are subjective and the best we can do is follow reviews from reviewers whose taste in games are similar to our own.
No, a review of a game is never "mostly" subjective. Personal preference comprises only a small portion of any good review. There are objective and qualitative aspects to any game.
what about this : KEY ---- 1-3 = piss poor 4-6 = okay ,just good 7-8 = great game 9 = excellent game 10 = revolutionary , must have game and then give the rating _ /10 to me thats the best system , i should patent it , lol
I would say keep the 10 system but push to make a certain system universal. I think every game should start as a 10, then knock off a point for everything you find wrong, broken, mismanaged or generally not fun about the game. In all honesty though it's probably not the fix that is needed or even the best option for still using the 10 point scale. It's a difficult question that's going to (hopefully) haunt game journalism this whole generation.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.