IGN: GDC 09: Are Game Ratings Broken?

Clint Hocking has a solution for a particularly vexing problem. The Ubisoft Creative Director says game review scores have been artificially inflated over the years, thanks in large part to the use of the 100-point scoring system. The fix? All game critics should switch to a five-star system instead.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Why o why3583d ago (Edited 3583d ago )

metascores imo

if u stick with the sites you trust you can pretty much gage how good/bad a game is no matter what system they use as long as they keep that system.

These 'metasites' seem to put their own tint on scores, some even give more credence to some sites over other sites. Worst thing is, is that they are meant to be serving us but we have little say in their methods. Best thing is to leave those sites alone and have your own top 3-5 sites metascore IF you need to have an average.


don't get me started on bias reviews/sites as half the people on n4g feel it/they don't exist at all. They point to scoring anomalies and say 'how can it be bias if...' You just cant reach some people even though the truth or questionable practices are right there for all to see if you look past the surface

In truth truth the gaming media is rife with double standards, payoffs and inconsistencies but some cant or just chose not to see it. Its not all bad though so i don't wanna sound like some conspiracy theorist i'm just staying in theme of the article

FarEastOrient3583d ago

We should go to a three item solution and I like Sarcastic Gamers' reviewing scale the best.

Rent It
Buy It
Ignore It

See simple and if we can make the iPhone pretty easy to use, all consumers will be able to relate to the three itme solution above. Now to argue which game is better is all based on opinion anyway because it is hard to get a game to be better than Chess in my opinion.

OGharryjoysticks3583d ago (Edited 3583d ago )

not the number given but the criteria for the evaluation.

A single player game without multiplayer should not be hit because it doesn't have multi.

A single/multi game that doesn't have co-op shouldn't be hit because no co-op.

and so forth.

If they kept consistant reviews it would be better but the way it goes it just seems bias to marketing and personal preferences.

hippo243583d ago

Compiling a subjective and complex experience into a numerical representation of the affair, is something that is not accurate in the least.

cliffbo3583d ago

the real problem is that reviewers have become critics and are starting to demand content in games insead of reviewing what is there. the perfect example is if a game doesn't have co-op, they put it down in score. this should never happen. it should be reviewed on what is there and how good what is there is.

JeanPool3583d ago

"reviewers have become critics" Switch those terms around and what you're trying to say will make some sense.

There isn't much criticism, just review.*

Karum3583d ago

Just be like kotaku and abandon scores.

Love them or hate them you have to like their review system. You don't have to always agree with their opinions in the review but at least they leave out the stupid scores that serve no other purpose than to fuel fanboy wars.

JeanPool3583d ago

It's good that they don't use scores, but their bullet point style is a very boring read.

Unicron3583d ago

Agreed. While I do not always agree with their opinions, HOW they review games is by far my favorite method, as it actually tells you about the title, the player's frame of mind, the pros and the cons. That means so much more than just a simple 8.9 or 9.1 or w/e.

Show all comments (24)
The story is too old to be commented.