IGN's Review Scale Changes

"Since IGN's inception more than a decade ago, we've scored games on a 100-point scale. That changes today.

After many long discussions (and really, this has been going on for years), we've decided to alter our review scale. From today forward, we will score games on a 20-point scale (meaning games score will be 7.0 or 7.5 or 8.0, etc.)."

[TheColbertinator]

Great Graphics 10

Great Soundtrack 10

Great Story 10

Excellent Replay Value

IGN Final Score 9.5

[HolyOrangeCows]

The only thing that matters about their scores today is that they give 9+ to any game from a publisher that buys ad space on IGN.

[blackbeld]

IGN gives A+ when they get paid. Or else they will give B-

IGN nowadays who cares them.

[ISKREEM]

Lost Planet 2 and Naughty Bear both had ad space on IGN, and were rated pretty poorly. So I don't think there's necessarily any truth to that.

But review scores in general mean nothing to me. The games that i've probably had the most fun with this generation are surprisingly some of the lower rated games. Bionic Commando, Lost Planet 2, Section 8, and Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2, just to name a few. If people actually took the time to play them, i'm sure they would find some fun in them as well. Instead of basing their decision off some random number.

[blackbeld]

Like Steven Colbert says.

IGN really gives ridiculous scores like that.
So how can you take IGN serious? Answer is No... IGN who cares.

[soxfan2005]

You're right. Maybe IGN would be taken more seriously if they gave out scores like 21/20.

I've found IGN's reviews to be an excellent source of information for the last decade. And, for those who can't read, their reviews clearly state that the "final score is NOT an average".

I'm glad that IGN can recognize that, in some cases, an overall game can be better than the sum of its parts, and vice versa. They don't just assign an arbitrary "average" as so many people have come to expect.

[SOAD]

there was ad space for a game called Legendary on IGN. IGN gave that game like a 4 or something.

[HolyOrangeCows]

Do I seriously have to put a qualifier and say "USUALLY"?
People have very poor skills in reasonable assumption.

If I said Trix cereal is delicious, would you assume even a box of Trix that somehow ended up moldy and disgusting after falling off a truck or being thrown out would taste great, and that every single piece of Trix cereal ever conceived on this planet was delicious?

Besides, I don't mean publishers like Gamecock Media Group (Legendary) or 505 Games (Naughty Bear). I mean heavy hitters like EA, Activision, etc. And sure, there can still be exceptions like with Capcom's Lost Potential 2.

[nix]

doesn't matter.. when GTAV comes out they'll hand out perfect score just like they did for GTAIV.

[SoSLy]

One of the most biased and corrupt websites out there

[AtatakaiSamurai]

Isn't it blantantly obvious by now that ALL large gaming sites do this? I mean come on. Yeah sure it got a 4, so what. They bought a spot or 2, normal... but had they bought far more spots for ads ain't no way that game gets a 4.

The numeric rating system is arcahic but they still use it cause it benefits they're munpulation of information however they see fit for business.

Back in the day gaming PR group would do "special" things for reviewers but reviewers would still give a crappy game a crap rating and they'd laugh about it but now, with the industry maxing at $60billion, business is business.

The reverse is the sa me. If a PR group spends their ad funds with exclusive deals to one big gaming site then the other ones may give them a bad or lower rating so next time the PR group may not want to leave them out of the "goodies". This is why you see reveiw ratings so vastly different this gen in opposed to previous gens.

One big game site gets exclusive interviews, vids etc and give 9s but the other big site says the game is a 7.9. They play the numbers game with the community cause they know the vast majority of us are just sheep.

Is this EVERY SINGLE TIME 24/7? no ofcourse not but it's done too routinely and is a significant part of the gaming industry business of "scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" mentality.

This is why if you say you don't trust gaming site X but more gaming site Z then you're being naive cause they ALLLLL do the same thing to compete with each other.

Go gaming sites for community chatter and vids of games. If you rely on their reviews to help you w/ your purchases then you have lost your way completly for gaming.

[deadreckoning666]

Excellent. One step closer to a fanboy free world :)

"They should do away with the decimals completely. I look forward to the day when Xbox and PS3 fanboys stop arguing over a fraction of a point differential in review scores."

Bubbles to you. I've always wondered what goes on in the head of people who whine over a fraction of a point or scores PERIOD. If you like a game, what the hell does it matter what someone else says about it? Yakuza 3 is my personal GOTY so far and several dozen whining fanboys that tell me otherwise doesn't matter to me in the least.

The best thing reviewers could do is to remove review scores ENTIRELY so that gamers can actually READ reviews.

Weekly comment in the books =D/

[dizzleK]

aren't ign the ones who went out of their way to write an article about how mass effect 2 was .1 better than uncharted 2?

http://xbox360.ign.com/arti...

while i totally agree with that old article, ign has done plenty themselves to fan the fanboy flames instead of simply letting their reviews speak for themselves.

i'd also like to see a world without review scores.

[Shepherd 214]

Nowhere in the article that you linked does it mention anything about being .1 better than Uncharted. The review scores say that but the guy who wrote that article never mentions it.

Not even that, but the Mass Effect 2 review was written by a different guy while this article is just one guys opinion who works at IGN of how he thinks Mass Effect 2 could could be seen as the better game.

Stick with the site more, they have articles from different perspectives on the side of PS3 games too, that Mass Effect article isnt the only time they have done that.

[PS360PCROCKS]

Haha ok dude Mass Effect 2 is better than Uncharted 2 I NEED YOU TO ACCEPT THIS! Haha IGN, I forgot about that. Such an asshole that guy is, telling people on the internet that his opinion is more valid.

[Gran Touring]

lol that reminds me of their Splinter Cell Conviction review.

[PeterGriffinSays]

He's tellin yall what I've been complainin about for years.

[Playerz8]

Hey, N4G should change the review scores too. It is just like IGN's.

[AnttiApina]

I think that anyone with a pair of eyes could read a review instead of looking at numbers and comparing them to OTHER GAMES!

Why the hell do people give so much credit to the final score? It's absolutely pathetic.

The review itself is what matters, not the final score you fools.

Why make changes to the scores? Why not remove them all together and actually make people read, HECK even watch the review of the game rather than just looking at the final score and saying: "man dis geim suks"

Like the article said (if someone actually read it): A Score Does Not Define a Game

And that's what is wrong with this industry and most of the gamers.

[ALFAxD_CENTAURO]

Finally something wise from IGN.

[cemelc]

So IGN pretty much copy the review system of gamespot.

Well i dont mind they still be a joke, since the problems are not the reviews are the reviewrs

[DatNJDom81]

You forgot to add PS3 exclusive. Then its a 9.5. lol

[DatNJDom81]

ign always nitpicks PS3 exclusives alot while letting 360 games pass on all their whack ass games. True story. aww well it is n4g.

[Eamon]

But what have they got to gain from nitpicking at ps3 exclusives?

Oh wait, don't tell me. It's because Microsoft is a member of the New World Order and Sony isn't. Best not to upset 'em then, eh?

Ahh, you're pretty smart!

[Yi-Long]

.... first the horrible redesign for the site, which just makes it a mess to quickly navigate to where you want to be...

...2nd... here in Europe we automatically get redirected to the UK-edition of IGN...

... and now this unnecessary change in the scoring-system.

What kind of rabid monkeys are running that place!? And by 'running' I actually mean 'ruining')

[AEtherbane]

theres a reason you read reviews instead of looking at the numbers...
If only IGN didnt have spelling mistakes.

[redDevil87]

I like this. It will stop the "why 8.9 and not 9.0". Its better for the website and might make scoring more consistent. (but theyre reviews will still be messed up)

[CrAnKiTuP_01]

No more "Tis game is bettah tan tis game becaase itz teh 9.2 and the other is teh 9.1!!1!1 lolollolz" xD

[mrv321]

I still think giantbomb has the best scale to date...

[Surkov]

1-5 stars and no half stars is the way to go. Sleek and simple.

5= excellent
4= good
3= average

And anything below, you should be wary of.

[Omega4]

Looks like they are doing a Gamespot

[Colonel-Killzone]

I like this improvement.

[skip2mylou]

i thought they always rated on a scale of 1-10?

[mrv321]

No, because 1-10 implies you can get upto 10 numbers. That would be 10 possible points

1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10.

A 100 points system implies you can get upto 100 numbers
1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5,1.6,1.7,1 .8,1.9 etc.

You get the idea... I think that what it means anyway.

EDIT: I ended it with 'I THINK THAT WHAT IT MEANS!' it's really too arrogant now... is it? I was stating what I believe to be true... I'm sorry, maybe I should of disagreed with the dude and not made any effort at all.

[ps2ftw]

actually....no.

1-10 = an infinite number of scores.
1.0000000001 is still between 1-10.
skip2mylou didn't say 10-point.

If your gonna correct someone you need to learn to do it right. (smartarse XD)

[sandip787]

you look like the smartarse trying to get all technical! you know what he meant by 1-10... mrv321 is right

[jerethdagryphon]

or 100 point is 1-100 20 point is 1-10 in .5 increments

[Eamon]

lol, idiots.

A 100 point system means a 100 "possible" points.

IGN used decimals up to 1 place in their scores and the limit is between 1-10. Therefore that's 100 possible points.

Retards.

[OpenGL]

They should do away with the decimals completely. I look forward to the day when Xbox and PS3 fanboys stop arguing over a fraction of a point differential in review scores.

[OpenGL]

lol, disagrees for wanting to end fanboy bickering over the most trivial of things. Only on N4G.

[cool cole]

Whiner.

[LordMarius]

Should be:
Must Buy
Buy
Rent
Skip

I think reviews should also take a game's price into account

[soxfan2005]

Price should not be a consideration. A game should be judged based on it's gameplay, sound, & graphics as they relate to the capabilities of the console they are designed for.

It's what's in the game that counts - not what a corporation decides to sell it for after it is already completed.

Look at it this way - would an movie that wins an Academy Award for Best Picture somehow be less deserving of that honor if it cost more for a ticket to that particular film?

[MicrocutsX2]

You should check out this site: Gameblurb.net, there scoring system is EXACTLY what you just asked for lol.

[HumanStark]

That's certainly less ridiculous. I hate 100 point scales. What is a 98? How is it better than a 97?

[gamingisnotacrime]

Finally something is being done about this matter

[The_Zeitgeist]

"Let's face it, trying to determine the finite difference between games to make one an 8.7 and another an 8.8 is just about impossible."

Seems like someone got sick of getting dissed on all the time.

[aCHU]

IGNorance is still not acceptable :)

[Count]

Until it gives a Ps3 exclusive a high score.

[Solidus187-SCMilk]

different versions of the game get the same scores. now a game will have to be alot worse to get a different score across platforms.

This is good, less arguing over different versions, and hopefully more attention will be paid to the actual review, instead of just a number.

[Unicron]

I still think Kotaku has the best review system.

Good stuff
Bad stuff
How much I played

Done and done.

Scores suck.

[TruthbeTold]

If IGN didn't hog big name game reviews with their clout, they'd be completely irrelevant.

[JonnyBigBoss]

Good move. I'm thinking about doing this on my blog/YouTube actually. 10/20 point scales are the best.

[gumgum99]

Just get rid of the numbers already. Reviews should speak for themselves. Not the numbers.

[Rybakov]

if its not call of duty god of war or grand theft auto worst games on earth its not a ten cause were not getting paid to give it tens like those games?

[theonlylolking]

Game sites are stupid when it comes to rating. If you look at what I would rate games most are not 8.0. Most games dont deserve an 8. Over 5 is good since it is not bad or awesome.

[faraany3k]

They are a bunch of wussies who cant review..NUFF SIAD/

[Memo-Xen x3100]

Back when gaming wasn't as popular was the only time IGN was worth checking. They just don't get the scoops anymore.

[chidori666]

ign is pathetic because their give high scores for only games hyped ( mw2 and others)

[-IronMan-]

Cant spell Ignorance without IGN.

[KillerPwned]

Eh this really does not concern anyone besides people that work for IGN.

Back in the day they used to be good now eh their ok i suppose. I don`t know if its just me doesnt it seem like anything on the internet about gaming like news,reviews all that stuff its just going down hill. I mean everything else is grand but you see sites like this that used to be amazing now their just shitting at least i think so.

Besides why care about what other people think on a game it matters what you think about it.

[PS360PCROCKS]

Soooo 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 and so on? Or do they mean 1-20? Like a perfect game is a 20?

[xino]

GRAPHICS- 10
GAMEPLAY- 9
PRESENTATION- 8
SOUND- 9

OVERALL- 6/10

[chasegarcia]

fk ign!!!!

[QuickdrawMcgraw]

1-4 GARBAGE,5-7 PLAYABLE,8-10 BUY.

[WLPowell]

"Buy it, rent it, pass on it" as the final "score"?

and you still get to write a review, but you never have to deal with those confusing numbers.

[lightningsax]

I'm actually kinda surprised. They had a norm, and the team got together and changed the system. Sure, it's not anything new, we've seen .5 intervals going back to the print era, but I really wonder what the net outcome will be. Just in case you didn't read the article, here's what got me interested:

"...we'll be continuing to make updates to our system throughout the year. Moving to a 20-point scale is just the beginning of a transformation to our reviews. I think you'll like where we end up."

I'm glad they're doing what they want to do when many sites are being so risk-averse and stagnant due to their increasingly fanboyish audiences. I wonder what happens next - I have a feeling that the subcategories (presentation, lasting appeal, graphics, etc.) are going to be the next things to change.

[Rashonality]

different scale same sh!tty reviews