Review Scores: Gaming Media's Problem

Carl B. of iNintendo.net explains why so many gamers and reviewers are upset over "low" scores, and uses Yahoo Games' 6 out of 5 review of Batman: Arkham City to show the insane amount of hyperbole in the industry.

[RoboSpiff]

8 out of 10 is a good score indeed.

[Sidology]

Times are tough with a shit economy. Most people take the stance of "If it's not a 9 or a 10, it's not worth my money."

[Moduserous]

That's my situation. If it doesn't get a near perfect score it doesn't fit into my budget.

[knifefight]

While logical in principle, that falls apart when all these media outlets are handing out 9's and 10's like there's a fire sale.

[LOGICWINS]

Most people take the stance of "If it's not a 9 or a 10, it's not worth my money."

Pretty stupid if you ask me. These people should know that these numbers are numerical forms of opinions. A 9 game for one person can be a 7 for another...and vice versa.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

Which is why you read multiple reviews. Anyone that decides a purchase off of one review is an idiot.

[LOGICWINS]

Basing a purchase or any type of decision on even MULTIPLE opinions isn't always the best thing to do. Thats like going back 8 years and saying "Everyone I know is voting for Bush a second time...guess thats the right thing to do."

Just because a lot of people(maybe the majority) think a certain way doesn't mean that they are "right".

[jacksonmichael]

For once, I agree with Logicwins. Lately, I have been ignoring reviews almost completely - just looking into the game and making a decision. I've been enjoying games much more. My best example being El Shaddai. IGN gave it a 5. It's my game of the year, so far. Lol.

[Venoxn4g]

indeed

[Pikajew]

I agree. Game series that started this gen Uncharted, Batman and Gears of War all get 10/10 because they are over hyped and publicized so much. Last gen we didnt have this so games didn't get 10/10 instead they were reviewed properly. If Uncharted, Batman and Gears were released last gen they would have gotten 8/10. Jak is a better series than Uncharted but since it didn't get as much attention as Uncharted, people think Uncharted is better.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

I don't know about that. Uncharted 2 was epic. I didn't like UC1, but UC2 made me a huge fan of the series. I love Jak also. I loved all Jak games. I really want ND to make a Jak 4.

With that said, I'm going to have to wait for UC3 to decide on which series is better. UC2 rivals any Jak game while all 3 Jak games sh*ts on UC1. So it's tough. Both series are great.

[AronDeppert]

Unless I completely respect the reviewer and outlet giving the score, I really try to take every score with a grain of salt.

For example, a 10 from GamesRadar means a lot more to me than a 10 from IGN.

[MartinGlow]

Damn straight. Gamesradar is my number one source for news and reviews. I also like the extras on the site. And while the reviews may be satirical, there is honesty behind each review. Love it.

[GamerSciz]

Agreed. I remember seeing a UK IGN review of MGS4 and it started off with the reviewer stating he hadn't played the 3 earlier games. I was like wtf?? What gives him the right to review the game. Also, not playing the first three affected his score as he gave it like an 8.5 or something lower then most other people. When I saw that is when I decided to create my own blog and write in terms of a true gamer's opinion who has a passion for games rather then being paid to write about crap I don't know.

Gaming Journalism today is sad really. Reviews is the most skewed thing out there.

In the end, a review is simply one person's opinion. With Gamefly, Redbox, and Blockbuster go out and spend a lot less money and try the game yourself...if you don't trust the reviews that is.

Also a similar article here I posted a few days ago. I agree with this idea that reviews aren't what they used to be.
http://n4g.com/news/864254/...

[RoboRyan]

People pay too much mind to the numeric score a game receives. An 8.5 is still great, and I enjoy hearing the opinions of reviewers who rate a game lower than the average score. Hell, I've enjoyed games I'd rank a 5-7. Doesn't mean they're not worth my time, just that I can objectively see flaws in them.

[Pro_TactX]

The problem with review scores is that they are incredibly inconsistent. One game will get a lower score for lack of originality, and another game will get a higher score for being "more of the same".

It is incredibly frustrating seeing that kind of inconsistency.

[Venoxn4g]

Yeah, about originality... there was a good game Ninja Blade (I really loved it), but some sites were giving low scores that it was named like a Ninja Gaiden clone..what's wrong with that? do we have a lot of games with ninjas this gen?

ontopic.. yeah people shouldn't trust reviews too much in these days.. I think if a game got 6 or 7 it can be a good game.. it's an opinion... yeah, read at least 2 - 3 reviews or maybe more... and if you see that one review is bad, it can be a troll one, looking for hits website or just a guy with preconception ... ( don't know if I used last word correctly, thats a google translate :)) guy with early opinion (who didn't played game at all) :)

[frayed]

Unfortunately, the system can't be fair mathematically, because human beings don't rationalise that way. I'm no philosopher or psychologist or mathematician, but here's my attempt at explaining it.

We have the notion of 100% but we don't 'use' the whole scale because 50%, while being mathematically half, does not work as an 'average' if we want to have quality.

We are successful as people and as a species because we consistently try to achieve better than 50/50 odds in everyday life.

While 50% may seem to be a medium, neither good nor bad, it is in fact BAD in most human experience. I don't want a 50% success rate when crossing the road safely. Or 50% of the food I buy to be considered safe to eat. I don't want 60% or 70% or even 80% safety records when I fly with an airline. Anything less than 98-9% in most safety scenarios is worthless. Granted, those are extreme examples with a strong cause effect REASONS for high standards. But progress in general is driven by a desire for high standards, in science, in education, in art etc.

Art (and entertainment) is quite forgiving, as it's rarely life or death, but still... what is the point of 50% art? No one wants it. Because once you arrive at the 50% mark, HALF of the experience is deemed to be negative, meaning there is NO positive reason to invest in it. Only once we go above 50% is the experience mostly positive, anything below is mostly negative. Worth, for most, is accumulated in positives. Something can't have negative worth.

Mathematically 50% is fine. It's still positive. Anything above 0% is. But when considering success, anything between 0 and 50% is mostly negative and anything above 50% is mostly positive. Seeing as a mostly negative experience is pointless, our notion of worth resets the baseline at 50%. Therefore, if we are to see any worth at all in something reviewed in a 10 point system, we will be looking for games reviewed above 5 out of 10. Presuming most games score between these points, a new average is created of 7 and 1/2% . So to be above average a game must score 8, 9 or 10 - 7 is still below average. Crazy. But true.

Am I right? I did I just totally go off on one. It feels right.

[MasterCornholio]

Unless a game is worth 60 euros to me. I always wait for a price drop or buy it used.

XperiaRay

[mike1up]

Nice read. I definitely recommend reading multiple reviews before purchasing a game.

As naive as this may sound, i never thought about the negative repercussions for reviewers that give out low scores to big budget games. How awful!

[Crazybone126]

I think this article sums it up quite well.
http://n4g.com/news/843093/...