PSXE says the way we review games is "all over the place," and in the interest of better serving the consumer, the industry should adopt a set critical format.
no. because its all about the text and not the score
Yeah, I agree. Although, those scores that are out of 4, 6 or 7 just seem stupid to me.
Its never going to happen Its like asking all devs to agree on profit sharing
Ha, nicely said. The other problem with universal scoring is just that it's an extremely unrealistic expectation, and it doesn't change the fact that subjective opinion will create variety in the scoring anyway. I never really understand what is meant by "standardized" scoring, it's not like you can clearly outline and categorize all games into intervals where they fail or succeed to meet a "standard criteria". You cannot standardize a person's experience or make it into a science A review should be read, and the reviewer should detail his/her experience of the game, which is then sometimes stamped with a score that should be taken in its own context. This should be the only, case-by-case standard: if you read a review and think the reviewer has justified his reviewing, then that should be it. I really enjoy reading GameFAQ reader reviews as they offer more in-depth opinions from the perspective of a variety of gamers.
I wrote a blog about a better solution imo. To me, it's not the scores, it's the reviewers mostly. Not everyone can like every genre, so if you hate RPG's and have to review one then obviously the score will be crap. On the same side, if you love them, then maybe the score will be too high. Solution - 2 reviewers, with equal levels of taste/distaste for the genre/series. http://n4g.com/user/blogpos... A standard score system would work, but there is no way to make them follow it.
I always liked the two reviewers idea, but then you could say both reviewers missed the point of the game or whatever. Two reviewers' opinion on one site is not really different from two reviewers opinions from two totally different sites. I honestly don't get why so much stock is put into one person's opinion. This was never a problem last gen, it's only now with all these fanboys warring and trying to 1 up each other that scores have been give so much more emphasis. I recall lots of scores I didn't like last gen, but people didn't blow things out of proportion as much. Honestly, if I didn't like a review, I just looked for a positive one. I've always viewed the process as shopping for a confirmation of what I want to hear, scores put things on a general scale, but people pay too much attention these days to the 0.1 differences.
The idea that reviews are all opinion is a complete fallacy, as is the idea that if a reviewer doesn't like a particular genre, the score will be "crap." That's entirely untrue and if you're reviewing games that way, you're doing it wrong. There are both objective and subjective parts to a review; saying it's all opinion is an insult to the critics and presumes that anyone who plays video games can do it. I listen to music...doesn't make me a good music reviewer. I don't know enough about it. There are indeed facts to consider, even in entertainment and art. Graphics, audio, and writing quality, along with depth and a variety of other factors are not as prone to subjectivity. One can say they LIKE the graphics of Skylanders more than the graphics in Uncharted; technically, however, the reverse is true. Personal opinion can't be quantified and everyone has preferences, including reviewers. But to imply that all of any review is opinion is both false and insulting.
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.