Canada.com calls for an end to numerical game reviews and questions the extremist nature of the games industry.
lol, at first glance i thought the link said "communistcanada.com& quot ; which ended up being rather fitting with the article's content. don't get me wrong, having begun R&C:ToD I think the 7.5 is less than the game deserves, but this touchy feely dialogue all games being equal stuff is a little too brave new world. people can rate games according to their opinions, and we can buy them (or not) according to ours.
I agree, this paragraph in particular stands out: "The problem lies with the extremist nature of the games industry. Console manufactures pit the fans against each other through juvenile PR tactics, and by using closed platforms that encourage gamers to segregate under their banner." I think this has nothing to do with reviews. It has to do with advertising and fan-boyism. Changing reviews is treating the symptom instead of the disease. As long as fan-boyism exists we'll have irrational arguments about the merits of consoles. Having a videogame monoculture would not change that either. It would just shift from manufacturers to developers.
But i think the maturity level of game media is way below the normal level of any other. You have people sitting on one side of the fence, taking pot shots at the other about console A or B. This kind of behavior is just childish. The statement below is very true. "If video gamers and game reviewers truly wish to be respected among their journalistic peers, they must rise above the checklist mentality set forth by the the video game business. It is in this way that game reviews can push for positive change, and hopefully create a better, brighter future for the industry." I don't think anyone from IGN, 1up, Gamespot etc could/would be respected amongst their journalistic peers from other industrys. The same cannot be said for the top music, art or film critics. Time for this business as a whole to grow up.
Bear in mind though guys that you can't stop "Fanboyism" as you call it. It isn't "Fanboyism" it's personal preference and yes, people are going to be biased. It's just how it is.
If you can't put your bias aside, you're no good for the job. An unbias opinion is kinda the whole point of a review. It's as simple as that.
Canada is a liberal, socialist country that resembles our Democrats in the U.S. They don't like freedom, and they operate on pure feelings or emotions (without faith in God). So, it doesn't surprise me that canada.com doesn't like a number associated with reviews. It's too rational.
"I don't think anyone from IGN, 1up, Gamespot etc could/would be respected amongst their journalistic peers from other industrys. The same cannot be said for the top music, art or film critics. Time for this business as a whole to grow up." Complete agreement here. I doubt they will though. There's really no need to. They (the bad ones) are playing the crowd fabulously. They love to hear that they started flamewars on n4g, etc. That's fab press. The videogame news industry will use the language of videogamers, the look of videogamers (with a hot chick thrown in), and the maturity/dogma of videogamers (just as the mainstream press does with their audience). For them to mature, the gamers must mature. The reviewers are a reflection and they polish that reflection to good effect in their pandering. And to: "Bear in mind though guys that you can't stop "Fanboyism" as you call it. It isn't "Fanboyism" it's personal preference and yes, people are going to be biased. It's just how it is." Of course we can't stop it. I wish we could, but it's more than personal preference, it's a sad state.
i don't agree. i think the videogame business and the reviewers have grown a lot in the last decade or so. the gamers on the other hand have not. this whole 7.5 thing is a great example. ppl are getting worked up about it, demanding that R&C be re-reviewed or demanding that the reviewer be fired(or worse). get the sand out of your collective vagina, stop acting like whiny little kids and get over yourselves. some in the media(like g4)seem to encourage the rabid fanboyism but for the most part the gaming media does a good job of being unbiased. @tplarkin7 thats uncalled for. there is no reason to bring you political views into a discussion on videogame reviews. just like there is no reason to bring your religious views into politics.
The sites will always play to the biggest part of their demographic (ie kids) and there's no doubt that spouting all kinds of hate in a podcast is gonna cause controversy and hits. But it's obvious by the conversation were having right now, that some of us of would like a more "mature" source (and perspective for the matter) for reviews and information and the main sites right now, the IGN's, Gamespots etc are not doing that. Either way, great debate...bubbles the whole way up for all of you!
This is referring to your second post I believe. The one just after mine. Yes, an unbiased reviewer is what's best for the job, but no one is un-biased. Everyone has a preference. Like I said that's just how it is. No one can change it. In an ideal world...
"Fans jumped all over the score on sites like N4G.com and Neogaf, claiming that Gamespot was biased agianst Sony, as if the review was a massive blow for the Playstation 3 console."
no one likes a biased website like GS On the other hand everyone likes GT,GI and IGN ---cuz they are very unbiased I think this is the end for GS ---the websites flagging hits would falter to NULL in a few months from now
I don't think that gamespot is a bad site. In fact i regard their reviews are GENERALLY better then IGNs. IGN gives better reviews to games that give them exclusive content, while I haven't played Ratchet and Clank so I can't say if its a 9.7 or a 7.5 i think that generally games are getting higher scores then they deserve. The fact that there have been about 20 9.0+ games this year is too many, at least to me especially this early in a console's life. If you consider Ratchet and CLank at 9.6, and the sequal is better in everyway it doesn't leave much for an improvement. I am just using RC as an example, but generally speaking I think that reviews should be more harsh with 8.0 being a great score and anything 9+ reserved for true gems.
65-75 -> average game. 75-85 -> good game. 85-95 -> great game. 95-100 -> masterpiece. imo. =)
I guess people can't review games the way they want anymore. It's your choice if you trust the review, and buy the game solely due to the review. Why dont you trust in what you believe, and not some dumb review. So what R&C got a 7.5, that's still great... I think people just need to get over it and make up their own mind.
That's the first time in a long time where I read a videogame orientated article that had such truth to it
why do people buy games base on reviews? I don't, and you shouldn't either. If you do, then you will be missing out on some really cool games, that you may find to be really fun.
I try to tell people the SAME EXACT thing you just said all the time. But it's as if people WANT to be led around like sheep, being told what to buy and what not to buy. It's sad really. Since it pretty much underminds intellect by saying someone else has to think for you
I do agree with you. Buy what you like. But asking advice from a friend who has the game would not be sheepish, right? When you do find a good set of reviewers, they can be like friends to ask. You learn which ones have your values and you take biases and weaknesses into account. I guess the only way I know to find out if a game is good is to rent it if you don't ask someone. I don't want to pay $8 if it's trash, and I don't play enough games for gamefly to be feasible. What do you suggest that someone in my situation do?
people buy games based on reviews because they cost $60.00 and the second you open it, you're stuck with it... i agree, dont go buy a game JUST because of the reviews. i.e. if you hate all the s-s-shooters out there, dont go by gaylo 3 and think its going to change your mind. but when a game does get a good review that's in your genere, one would hope its good. My problem iwth R & C is it is not a 7.5 game like the lolbox fans at GS say. but IMO, its not a 9.5 game either... maybe 8.5 but its not "all that" last time we saw this was recently with gaylo3. most agree the game is no "10" like many site graded. in fact of the 3 gaylos, its the worst... this crap has to stop, or the games have to stop being $60 lol. why are 360 games $60 any, its still on DVD right? or did they finally make it next game and put games on HD-DVD?
if biased game sites are gonna mark down one to make it look bad id question the games that are getting marked up. seems to me the games may not be as good as youre led to believe. ive been duped this way b4 so now i just rent b4 i buy to make sure . my advice would be for you all to do the same
King2008 - 19 Hours ago PM Track Ignore7 - STOP!!! With the AAA crap. If you like the story or various elements then buy the game...please dont let this be another game that you let reviews talk you out of buying because its not rated 15/10. I'll be picking this up regardless of the reviews single player co-op seems great and definitely looking forward to the multi-player. I wish reviews didnt give out scores. Just talked about the problems and whats great about the game. Leave it up to the gamer to decide the score based on their likes and dislikes ~END~ Critics shouldnt be allowed to put a value on someone else's hardwork. Just list positives and negatives...
Wow... strange grading scale. 75% was an average C when I was in school (except in a private school, where it was 1 point above a D), and nowhere near a B or B+. Anyway: "Video games are supposed to be art. You would never see art critics describing paintings using a bell curve. They either like it or dislike it. There's no math, pie chart or graph, involved. Each reviewer is entitled to their own interpretation of the piece, and the same should go for gaming." So a boolean number would be ok? That would put ratings at either 0 or 1, like or dislike. They're right though. Art critics never rank movies, books or music with Stars or Out-of-Five scales. Are we talking about visual (painting/sculptural) art? Cause last time I looked at a painting in a gallery I did it for free. Sometimes I pay 10-15 dollars to look at a ton of them, but, you know what? The galleries are ranked by critics so I don't waste my money. You see, videogames are art, I believe that. Videogames are also commercial goods. That's why they have ratings/reviews with scores. If they start giving them away then the consumer can play them without risk. Otherwise I'll take a flawed review system over pure advertising. Cause we know that a game's never hyped and couldn't be hyped if we'd just do away with those pesky scores. Wake up. Bad reviews or no, we're in a golden age of game reviews. When I was a teenager there were like 2 or 3 videogame magazines that were hard to get ahold of and no tv reviews/no internet. People can certainly get bought out now, but they could then and the difference now is that you have alternatives. Like n4g forums... etc.
I mean, I certainly think reviewers all are entitled to their own opinions and should publish as such and let us decide if we find their critique worthy. That really is the key to reviewers...find one you like and stick with it. But I will say this...with so many review sources out there, and often times each of those sources employs multiple reviewers its hard to have a following to just one reviewer or source as your game in question may not always be handled by them at the time of its release,etc.. So, a standard of reviewing would be a welcome idea. I don't mean to say, tell reviewers what they can and cant say. But rather adopt ONE system. Whether a 5 pt scale or a 10 pt scale, stars, letter grades...whatever. Just make it uniform. So when a score from Gamespot comes in at 8.5 and one from Gamespy is 4 stars and one from IGN is 9 and then Famistu giving a 32/40 ...we are left doing math to try and figure out equivelant scores, etc. And yes I know Gamerankings does this for us...but I would venture to say a 3 out of 5 on a site doesnt translate into a 6 out of 10 on most other sites. Usually other sites would be in the 7 to 7.5 range on games that are 3 out of 5's. Anyway, I think you get what I mean.
Yeah, I don't think the sites would be receptive to changes like that. It would be nice if it was easier to parse the numbers though. I know it means some work, but I guess I bought a lot of turkeys back in the day (like Beyond the Black Hole, basicly a memory/pong game with 3d glasses and a space theme) and I'd like to have my $40 back (sounds cheap now, but I worked a lot of part-time hours for that pos).
I totally agree with this. The numerical system just isnt any good. I just want to know one thing when i see a review...is it fun? just do away with that lame number at the end that causes so much controversy,that way we can focus on the actual games rather than debate whether the score is high or low enough. I think the painting analogy is a good one. its either good or its not.
even static sight. I for one appreciate if the reviewer notes how the sound/music rates (Bioshock), any animation issues (or raising the bar), overall gameplay and how the artificial intelligence rates. While a painting could be a thumbs-up/thumbs-down affair (we all have our tastes), videogame reviews require more before they get to the overall composite review number. Even then, if your not sure, RENT the game. gCM
I don't know about others but as for me, the problem wasn't the score itself but the way they got the score. How is it possible that there are more praises than negatives yet have a 7.5? Why is variety in gameplay all of a sudden a bad thing? Yet when a game that has all linear gameplay gets bashed on yet is overlooked in the final score? God Of War a great game but the gameplay is the same and repetitive all the way through yet it's hailed as one of the best for PS2. Also the fact that Gamespot appointed a known XBOX fanatic and Sports reviewer to grade one of PS3's best games. It just doesn't add up, makes no sense whatsoever. If they had more negatives than positives and REASONABLE negatives at that, and appointed a PS3 gamer with experience in platforms or the like and he gave it a 7.5 then there would be no problem. Summary - XBOX reviewer was appointed Sports reviewer was appointed More positives than negatives Unreasonable negatives (Too much variety wtf? perhaps the difficulty is a bit too easy though) Oh my fix for this, have multiple people review the game and tally up the final score from that, rather than have 1 sole person giving their final score. That way if they all give a game a low score we'll know they're all douchebag fanboys...I kid..
I've disagreed with this article quite a bit, but there's one area where I agree with them. Positives and negative shouldn't have to be quantified into exact scores of 1 point each that adds up perfectly to the final score. A game can be much or much less than the sum of it's parts. We want everything to be logical, but videogames evoke emotional reactions and those are even harder to score. Not everything needs to add up.
You know I think another big thing is we are all so "caught up" in what a score means...but the problem is I dont think we the public have a true grasp on what a score should mean...and I really think reviewers have lost sight of this too. Now a day, we look at anything in the 7's as being bad. But reality is 7's are 70%...which in school is "Average". So how is that bad? I also think the other part of the problem is in a 10 pt scale period. We look at 70% being average because in school we are taught the grade system and we apply that to game systems without thought. Reviewers never give games 1 or 2 out of 10's...they always are atleast 3 out of 10 or higher from all I have ever seen. So ...then whats the point of having a 10 pt system if 2 of the pts never get scored? I personally think we should go to a 5 pt system for everyone. 5 = Great game 4 = Very good game, but just misses in certain areas keeping it from being great. 3 = Average game, may ony appeal to niche players,etc... 2 = Below avg, had some good ideas but just couldnt pull them off 1 = Poor game This kind of system would be infinitely more user friendly to gamers. and would help real in some of the out of control reviewers we are seeing out in the industry.
Stop complaining. Reviews are just opinions. Go rent the games or play at a friend's house, if you have one.
Is your Mom paying for that rental? because it's $10. not much no, but that 16.66% of the cost of the game... any smart person would have a hard time with this unless they KNEW they would only play it for 5 days and thats it...
I pay my own way through life. Don't get upset with me because a $10 dollar rental appears to be too much for you. Any smart person can figure out a way to earn $10 for a rental or $60 for the game.
back in the days when no demo and internet just started, we wouldn't know when a game is good or not by looking at the box. We mostly use IRC or BBS to discuss about games. Luckily there are game magazines, we used to read their experts takes about that games and bought them if it suited us. This trend later continue to websites such as IGN and Gamespot. Although there are demo available now, reviewers still come in pretty handy. it is still a great tool for you to at least understand your product before you purchase. If you just use one tool and based all from them, you are going to be SOL. That's why metacritic comes in handy. Great example will be gamespot. If you believe in gamespot, you're going to get screw so bad, but if you use metacritic, you will see a greater picture. Also one thing you need to consider is culture. Reviewers might reviewer a game based on their culture. For example, in US which big on FPS, FPS will ended up having high score. Games like Dynasty warrior 5 will get a subpar score simply because most American cultures doesn't enjoy it.
"Also one thing you need to consider is culture. Reviewers might reviewer a game based on their culture. For example, in US which big on FPS, FPS will ended up having high score. Games like Dynasty warrior 5 will get a subpar score simply because most American cultures doesn't enjoy it." and that is sickening!!! Yes, most US like FPS. and, the avarage IQ in the us is also subpar... the intelegant who want something that chalenges the brain get screwed to the point they dont even release the game in the US, and all the "dummys" get to play FPS's ... /sigh
Dynasty Warrior just plain sucks. In it's case, it is not a cultural barrier. The game is just garbage. However, I do realize you were using that game title as an example to explain yourself thoroughly.
well I think reviews are helpful, sometimes i don't even look at the final score and just read why they gave it that and then normall I can tell if its BS or if the game is for me. If I'm interested I always buy it, but certain games, like haze for me, I won't buy unless it gets pretty good reviews or after several gameplay videos. I think there is too much personal opinion in reviews. SEE DW is a perfect example if bloody sinner reviewed it, it would get a horrible score, but if I or g4n review it, it might get a higher score. What I learn in college in my art and film classes, that sometimes you have to look at the target auidence, would they like it. I don't think its possible for some people. Personally I would give DW gundam a 9, but I know there is flaws and its not for everyone so i would rate it down a tad, but then i would look at it would people who love DW or gundam love it? the give it a 7.5 or a 8. I think they should just say pass or fail. Would fans of these games love it or hate it. Then let the masses pick for themselves. People just need to learn to let their own predjuces or whatever you want to call it out of it. Be more objective.
@lonestarmt: Yeah,that's why right now, Developers are rushing to make a demo. They know if you play the demo and you like it, even the though the reviews seem pretty bad, you still buy it. Like DW Gundam for me, played the demo, liked it, reviews pretty bad, still buying it and never regret it. @Bloodsinner: You can never seen or know any cultural barrier if you still stuck in one badly, simple because anything else is garbage to you. Thanks for your comment though, we have a live example that we can use of. hehe
i still say GS is a joke and that fat turd knows he was wrong. When 9 out of 10 ppl tell you you need a shower and you side with that one guy who really doesnt like you you stink
While I do believe that the change is needed, I really think the numerical system and game scores should stay.
I think what people fail to realize is that game reviews from sites or magazines for that matter are all subjective. There is no way you can make a game review objective. Thus you get different scores and different people get upset. Duh! So that is why I read a few reviews and consider the score on metacritic and gamerankings instead. It is more of a collective scoring of variety of people and if most people enjoy it, then mostly will I. On another note, I think the scoring system is excellent and wish all sites had the same system. The book review thing is just a subjective boring analysis.... Of course that is my personal opinion though.
I really believe score affects how gamers approach the game, and it represent how good the game is without having to read or watch a review. It's all about the reviewer; the score gamespot gave to R&C (and other great games) is very wrong and showed how biased their reviews are. Take for instance their reviews on launch titles like perfect dark Zero(360) where they praised the game and even gave it a medal eventhough its mediocre,while they gave a resistance(PS3) a lower score eventhough its a much better game,and of course there's the Zelda review for the wii where they praised the game but gave a less than what it deserves score. I personally believe that Demos is the way of the future, while reviews will become just for second opinion.
maybe people just need to be more intune with what they will like or dislike, and have a better understanding of the game, and make their own opinion, and not let a review sometimes tell them to get a game or not.
I think no game deserves to be reviewed "perfect (10/10) unless it is really perfect, which will never be the case.
The reason behind this is because of the bias of reviewers against the PS3. Some games got 10/10 that was not as good as this title - and it proofs that the bias was so blatant that there is now calls for reviewing the reviewing system. That is a clear vote of no confidence in the integrity of the reviewers. Expect more calls for a new review metric.
With all the reviews we have now and the flamebait that always seems to ensue after the major ones come in I just use metacritic. I hope more and more developers start to release demos so people can really make up their own minds about what games to purchase, rent or just completly forget about. A change to just Pro and Cons for reviews might be able to get me reading them again, but until then I think I'll just stick with metacritic and demos to save myself time.
When was 75% a B+? ......
I whole heartedly agree with the editor who wrote this article. Since when did people go so low that websites like vgchartz has become so important all of a sudden. Why do you care how many units a game sells if you like the game or hate it? Gamers have become sheeps like those that watch Fox news. They are told what to believe and what not to... I could careless how much Polygons i get on my screen as long as i am having a great time... And for this i respect VALVE.. Look at TEAM Fortress II.. That game is one of the most fun games i have had in a long long while even though the graphics aren't high end at all but its simply the way they have made the game. Now i can understand that when peoples money are at stake they need to look at professional reviews. When your spending 60$ on a game you want to know if that game is worth the money or just a rental. In this regard i would like to add that Professional Websites need to write reviews properly. My personal place to look for great reviews is www.gametrailers.com without a shadow of a doubt they have the best video reviews..Precise and straight to the point.
More reviewers need to be like 1up. If a game sucks, 1up will give it a 1/10, whereas most others sites will give bad games a 5/10. With anything below an 8/10 being considered unfavorable, there is such little space for scores to go on most sites.
tplarkin7 1.5 - Feelings vs Reason "Canada is a liberal, socialist country that resembles our Democrats in the U.S. They don't like freedom, and they operate on pure feelings or emotions (without faith in God). So, it doesn't surprise me that canada.com doesn't like a number associated with reviews. It's too rational." You obviously know nothing about Canadian politics as you would know the current prime minister is more right wing then left. Basing your comments on past government knowledge is ignorant to say the least. Have you ever been to Canada? My guess would be no otherwise you might have a clue to our level of freedom. Last time I checked Canada is a much more "free" country then the US. And I mean no offense to US citizens when I say this but we get away with much more here. That can be a good thing and a bad thing though depending on the situation. Yeah we operate on pure emotions, lmao. Take your bible thumper comments somewhere else. Maybe pull your head out of your ass before you come back to post more ridiculous comments.
Why is it that every time a mediocre or bad PS3 review comes out there is "bias"? They gave Ninja Gaiden Sigma and R6V 9.0's. They gave Oblivion a 9.5 on PS3. If they thought that R&C deserved higher, then they would've given a higher score. They're only one website though. There have been times when one website gives a terrible review, and another site will give a good review to the same game. I would read several reviews before making ,my final verdict about any game. And by the way, 75% is a C. 88 to 89 would be a B+.
This article is worth the read. Take it to heart. Even though I consider myself rather moderate/right (as someone up there was trying to tie this into politics), I agree with the artistic review. I love art, and games are art. You don't slap a number on art. Try taking a HS-College level art class, paint something you like and ask the teacher for a grade. That will probably tell you how much other people's opinions correlate with your own: one man's trash is another man's treasure. So if you really like the Matrix but the Matrix game got a bad score, then BUY IT. Because YOU like the MATRIX and you can play IN the MATRIX so it has personal value. Some games have emotional value to people. For instance, I will probably buy the next Pheonix Wright, not because it's revolutionary, but because Pheonix is awesome, and I love the story. Well, out of time, gotta go.
Some of the major gaming magazines give 2 or 3 different opinions when they review a game, and often the reviewer will say something like, "I usually spend more time playing sports/fps/rts games, but this game...etc.," if the game being reviewed does not fall into their usual tastes. A very major gaming site such as Gamespot, for example, should, in my opinion, take the responsibility of providing a review which is more than just a single person's opinion. I am one who honestly does base his purchases on the reviews of sites such as Gamespot. Two thumbs down says a lot more to me than one thumb down. Also, I have seen a lot of sites where scores are an unweighted average of graphics, sound, fun, innovation, replay value, etc. Now, shouldn't the "fun" category alone be worth 75% of the grade? Some sites need to give more weight to the more important aspects of a game.
i wish 75% was a B+ in America. wouldve made high school a lot easier for me ;)
It's up to the consumer, weigh in all the reviews and make up your own mind, rent first if you need to. Your going to have biased reviews in every review because "everyone" even those who own "all" the systems have a favorite. If the site or mag has Xbox, Playstation or Nintendo in the title then you should be smart enough to know that the review will be biased, everyone else you need to judge for yourself. The only time people hate reviewers is when a game they like or are looking forward to gets low scores and then they get primal. Xbox, Nintendo and Sony get bad reviews the Xbox just has more high scores this round while the PS3 is in the middle and the Wii seems to get the lowest even though they are the top selling console (funny).
I am so going to get flamed for this but really, there is too much hate in the world and not enough love. This is a great idea to get people to read and communicate more on a positive level. I don't think game reviews are all that reliable anyways so if it was reduced to a short essay(OMG I did NOT just suggest essays!!!) I would likely believe more of what I read. I just got a console for the first time in 37 years and when I read game reviews they are all '9.0!', '9.25!','9.5!', 'BUY THIS GAME!' I haven't really read many that didn't feel like plugs or weren't critical of comparing it to some other game that already came out. It's like 'yep already done with Blah game, but it's ok anyways.' Anyways I agree with the article :)
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.