Top
190°

Review Scores Are Dead

Ninjarefinery writes: I’ve read a massive amount of reviews in my time.  So many gaming sites provide such in-depth reviews and quality content that I’ve truly been able to decide on a purchase based on a balanced view of what all these people are telling me. However, I’m certainly guilty of checking review scores and writing-off some potential gems, because it’s quick and easy to do. Is that fair though? I feel like scores are actually screwing people over.

Read Full Story >>
beyond-gaming.net
The story is too old to be commented.
ccgr52d ago

Scores are a nice takeaway or a good way to know if a game is good without having to read 2000+ word reviews

OB1Biker52d ago (Edited 52d ago )

Scores are subjective by definition.
It depends on what you expect from a review but I wish they were more than mere subjective opinion. I wish they actually helped people figure out if they will enjoy a game.
Edit:
It has come to the point where you wonder if the whole review is about justifying a biased score. The score has become the focus. The score and the necessarily 'strong' opinion.

UCForce52d ago (Edited 52d ago )

Yeah, the review score system is a mix bag. Eurogamer completely removed the review score. Also Kotaku which I know a lot of people including myself don't like them, but they never use review score.

ninsigma51d ago

"you wonder if the whole review is about justifying a biased score"
And then you have reviews where the score doesn't even match what was written.

they'll never be gotten rid of though. They fan the flames of online arguments so it drives up clicks. They'll never let that go.

PixelOmen51d ago (Edited 51d ago )

Reviews are subjective, period. There is no objective metric by which they are measured, the entire thing is nothing more than an opinion reached through a subjective analysis. A number doesn't make a review any more or less subjective. About the only thing in a review which is objective is whether or not the game has bugs.

OB1Biker51d ago

@Pixel
'A number doesn't make a review any more or less subjective'
Id rather they use hearts. as silly as it sounds, at least it would speak for itself as to the meaning being the degree the writer likes the game. as it is, thats what a number represents but pretending it has anything to do other than LIKING. You can see people saying the game is good or bad. thats not what scores are actually about.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 51d ago
MetalGearsofWar51d ago

What if said score is bought?

Liqu1d51d ago

Hou're looking at reviews so you can make an informed purchase, simply looking at a number does not achieve that. You need to actually read the review to see why the critic scored it the way they did and sometimes the score doesn't even match the words.

gangsta_red52d ago

Review scores are great. What's the difference if a site trashes a game and another trashes it and leaves a 5 or below? The game is still trash according to both websites.

UCForce52d ago (Edited 52d ago )

Ok, but why did people like IGN gave Evole a high score ? It didn't make any scenes. That game didn't have a lot of contents. Even I remember COD MW 3 gave a lot of high scores but COD fans hate it for being way too familiar. This is where some people starting doubt the game journalists. Review scores used to be good, but now it's just a mix bag.

gangsta_red52d ago (Edited 52d ago )

It's always been a mixed bag. Your opinion of not having enough content differs from theirs, a lot of COD fans like the new games. What you need to do is take reviews as a suggestion and not a fact.

Would your review of a game be anymore accurate or 100% correct than any others...with or without a score?

52d ago
UCForce52d ago (Edited 52d ago )

Another one like The Evil Within 2, that game has massive improvements over the first one. But still, critics gave the game a 76 on MetaCritics but users gave even higher like 86. Like I said before, gamers don't take game journalists anymore. Opinion is opinion, but it need to execute pretty well and it need to be unbiased which only few journalists can do that because most of "journalists" are just biased.

OB1Biker52d ago (Edited 52d ago )

I'm not into reviews for choosing the games I want. Nobody will tell me what I should like or dislike. I do like reading an open minded review once in a while., specially when the writer obviously loves his job.
Even if I'd be into scores, there s a big anachronism that doesn't add up with what a score means. There r many examples of games evolving significantly after a few months. Check out a score a year after the game release and see what it tells you. Yea that's right. It tells you nothing about the state of the game at the time you fancy it

UCForce51d ago

Now you see reviews are mix bags. Someday, some big sites will remove the score and do the same thing like EuroGamers.

OB1Biker51d ago

Yes I used to be very wary of Eurogamer reviews and found them very biased. I do respect the sites giving up the score click system.
Another major flaw is metacritic. We saw how, more and more, they use irrelevant sites scores. When I say irrelevant, I mean fantasy scores. You see what I allude to with Washington post 4/10 U4. In a way it makes me glad they demonstrate how irrelevant scores are becoming and I don't think they have a future. In the mean time, they are becoming a laughing stock.

gangsta_red50d ago

"Now you see reviews are mix bags"

How will getting rid of review scores change reviews being a mixed bag? You're too hung up on a number.

SegaGamer52d ago

I don't listen to reviewers anyway. The best ways to judge a game is to watch a video on Youtube or take a risk and go in blind. I personally think most games that are rated highly are overrated by reviewers anyway.

ninsigma51d ago

The big releases get over rated every year no matter how buggy the game. It's ridiculous.

FinalFantasyFanatic50d ago

This is my issue with reviews, sometimes games get reviewed just on brand name alone and not the actually content of the game. FFXV had alot of flaws but I never saw many reviews pointing out those flaws, just explaining why the game is so great. As for popular opinion on the internet, it was polarizing at best.

sotaladi51d ago

I cannot believe that some one can earn $12119 in 4 weeks on the computer .

see this here>>>>>>&g t;>>>> http://tiny.cc/online-jobss

Kun_ADR51d ago

Well tell that to Metacritics.

staticall51d ago

I kind of enjoy how ACG rates the games, explaining all the bad and good sides and says, does game worth buying, renting or just ignore it.
Or Famitsū, with 4 different people rating the game and those individual score combined is the result score. There's a higher chance this score will be more accurate, because different people might like or hate different things. And their perfect 40/40 scored games never disappoint.
I completely don't trust IGN and alike, because they praise one games for being true to their original formula and not too innovative and then bash others, because "they're too similar to the previous game" or "too much water" or some other stupid excuse.
So my problem is not scores, it's the big companies who rate game on how much people pay them, not if the game is good or not.

InMyOpinion51d ago

ACG is my go to reviewer. Karak is the most unbiased, entertaining and educated reviewer on the internet.

FinalFantasyFanatic50d ago

I like gameranx too, it really helps with my purchase choices.

Show all comments (35)
The story is too old to be commented.