Review scores are something that cause a lot of debate. They also spawn a lot of opinions about the reviewer... Which is why Jason from PlayerEssence will be sticking with them! Enjoy!
while well based on that just buy cod every year then that game has never got below an 8 ever and it's the same freaking game for 10 years smh
When a game gets a 6 or 7, I think it's mostly because it doesn't have a lot of replay value. I've gotten and played some pretty good 6 and 7 games before. It's just that people don't want to try things out that they think "sucks." CoD doesn't change up their formula that much which is why they keep getting scores like 8 and 9, and because of the online replayability. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Yeah but then why do reviewers give a game like God of War Ascension low scores saying "Feels The Same" "Nothing Innovative" & give it a bad review yet they keep it the way fans love the game mechanics because its not broken but every COD game feels the same and get good reviews. That tells me how BS the review system is now. Lets be honest, reviewers are alot harsher on Exclusives then they are multiplatforms especially playstation exclusives. Even games like The Last of Us had a few reviews that gave it a 5 or 6 out of 10. Its obvious this isnt even a legit review but more of a click & bait review to cause a stir for hits. This is a reason I dont trust reviews anymore. If I see a game that has me interested, i'll buy it & if im not too sure or it will be worth it, i'll rent it & try it out & if I like it i'll go out and buy it.
That's why I play the game and enjoy it regardless of another person's opinion.
* In a Race, if both appear to cross the finish line at the same time, do they both win? No. Why ? Because you just use a more accurate and detailed measurement to get a more accurate result. * If both cross finish line at 10, you go to the next closest measurement. So we then.....after checking FACTS, come to the conclusion that Racer A = 10.2 seconds & Racer be finished with a time of 10.3 seconds. So in reality.....based on FACTS, Racer A wins because he ACTUALLY finished first. Size is relative and anything can be measured more accurately if you actually put in the time, effort & intelligence to do so. * If a two games get 8/10, they obviously both aren't at the same level, yet said Reviewer/site is saying they are. * I want more accurate. So the more numbers....the more options...the more accurate. Two games = 8/10 Two games more realistically = A.) 8.5 B.) 8.8 One is OBVIOUSLY a slight step above the other in almost every category, but not by a ton. It still needs to be recognized as such. * You don't have to only buy 8.0/10 games and above though. * You still have the choice to buy a 6/10 game and you may even enjoy it.
Eurogamer still use a score system. Recommended, Essential or Avoid (1 - 3 system). They just made there review system worse.
Review scores aren't going anywhere. Fanboys feed off them for bragging rights and flame wars. 80% of gamers on game sites are fanboys. Casual gamers that play madden and call of duty every year don't give a crap if it's on Sony or Xbox. It's like watching a DVD on a DVD player...no one really cares what brand of DVD player you're using. Unless some kids actually go there. Anyway, Play Magazine tried getting rid of review scores people stopped buying the mag. Websites actually went down to zero traffic when they stopped review scores. TL;DR right? How dare people actually read a full review. Fanboys don't read for actual game play details. They only look for positive things that cater to the side they chose to be on. Be it mostly negative quotes on competing hardware. We as gamers asked for it. Before Sega Genesis versus SNES magazines used to read like catalogs. Trying to sell you on games. Readers demanded comparisons to be made. It's natural and fun to debate which version of Final Fight, Mortal Kombat, and Street Fighter 2 is best. Now it's gotten so nitpicky gamers are talking frame rates, polygon counts, and resolutions.
Bravo sir. Totally agree. I've never understood the point in NOT owning all the platforms...if you have the money. I see people talking about having more money and intentionally refusing to buy a certain console. There is nothing to be proud about when you're limiting the amount of games you can play. How do you not want more of your favorite hobby? It's like someone who's a basketball fan and refuses to watch games because all the games aren't on ESPN. Makes no sense. Financially I understand that not everyone can afford everything and we aren't all made of money. But to literally not buy games you could purchase is the dumbest thing I see in the gaming world. I can't imagine a time where I'd be bragging that I have access to less games than other people.
WAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIT wait wait wait... Are we REALLY treating the position to keep review scores as a bold move? XD
Hey, this is a weird time after all. There was a crazy earthshaking reaction when PS4 was announced to play used games.
You'd think the things I'm saying would be a given, and yet we look at the state of gaming sites and forums as well as me being asked/suggested to remove review scores, and it seems someone had to say they're not a bad thing! Haha xD
IMO I think if a site is going to review games they need to make developer, publishers and consumers aware of there point system. A good example would be. Short game by today's standards -1 Buggy game -1 No replay value -1 Bad Frame rate -1 Explain that these reasons will get your game negative points. That way no one can complain because if they ship a game knowing these problems exist they no they will be scored badly based off of that.
Yeah that's a good idea actually. If every site showed how they break down their scores then it will avoid situations where scores are taken from one but not another for doing the same thing.
It would be interesting to have like an universal list of criteria for all reviewers to base their reviews on if they are willing. And are to mention that the review (score) is based on that list On one side this will take care of most bias and unfair comparisons or expectations On the other side.. it could take a sense of personal opinion away, which you sometimes need to judge wether a game ''feels'' right, and not sterile or uninspired
Actually I feel all game reviews should have no score. A lot of the time people don't even read the review they just skip right to the arbitrary number. :/
That wont happen tho because its the 4/10 or 2/10 scores that get them the hits and hits means money from ads, so all they mean when they say they are keeping scores is they want to keep the click bait coming.
"A lot of the time people don't even read the review they just skip right to the arbitrary number." Sounds like the solution's more in the readers' patience rather than the numerical score.
Arbitrary numbers also generate a lack of communication. Many people will act as if a 6 - 7 score is somehow in the bad range and it is largely because they won't actually read the review and see that many times those scores communicate a game the reviewer felt was fun but flawed. The problem could very well lie with the audience but I feel one way of combating that is just to remove the number. IMO to me it means very little. The text before it is what is truly important.
Considering how most official review sites, at least our most popular ones here, have some kind of review score template in order communicate what said score means, I think your terribly misusing the term "arbitrary" for most cases. Don't get me wrong: I can understand your concern, especially when considering how under-served you, as a viewer, have been when it comes to numberless-reviews in games media. But I don't think the solution would still be in getting rid of them altogether, namely b/c I like them. And while I might play with it more than some official site's score rules, I enjoy evaluating these games in x/100 way similar to how my papers were graded during school. It just fits in my screwed-up head I guess. And I personally like seeing a score and then reading how that person came to said conclusion. The text will always be of prime importance but that doesn't mean we should get rid of secondary extras just because people cry about them so often. (Sorry for being late. Forgot all about this response.)
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.