"Scoring" games - yay or nay?

I’ve been provoked to write this short overview on the topic of reviewing games and giving them a numerical score at the end, mostly by the plethora of gamers on various news forums I regularly visit. Their argument is that a game should not be observed /cared for if it has a low score either on separate basis (graphics, gameplay, multyplayer, etc) or overall. Also, it is much more time efficient to just scroll down a review of a game you were interested in, jumping to the part where each element of the game is judged by a numerical value (go, go Metacritic?). Since we live in a stressful world where time is of the essence, it is no wonder that the majority of gamers tend to rely on these numbers to make a decision to either buy a certain game or not. While I cannot judge my fellow gamers on their own personal choices, it is my decision to argue with the “wrongful notion” to accept this “reviewing pattern with numbering” and delve into the deeper meaning. After all, reviews are opin...

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
ZBlacktt2704d ago (Edited 2704d ago )

I think everyone should be there own judge. Think of how many games that have been passed over because of low scores. Then you have games like GTAIV that for me. Was totally slow and boring getting a near prefect score. Everyone's taste's and points of view are different. As will the experience of each game.

RandomGamer2704d ago

I agree.There are too many sheep that just follow their shepherd,their fav site gives a game a 6 then they don't buy it,yet it gives another game a 9.5 and they rush to buy it.

I also agree with GTAIV as well.I thought it was overrated and no where near as fun to play as GTA San Andreas.

ZBlacktt2704d ago (Edited 2704d ago )

Brother I put countless hours into playing CJ myself, lol. I also loved playing Tommy Vercetti as well.

btw, I meant to say up top " Everyone should be their own judge "..... :(

MintBerryCrunch2704d ago

i honestly believe that it was the immense hype that helped GTA's score...people couldnt wait for the game and once they finally got it, they were too excited and looked past the games flaws...the same goes for MW2...lag/glitch fest and yet a numerous 9's and 10's

DarkSpawnClone2704d ago (Edited 2704d ago )

actually i didn't mind GTA4 yes it was over rated sure SA and VC were better games but i had alot of fun with gta4,it wasn't perfect but if there's one thing iv noticed it's that the first gta to release on a next gen console aways seems to be mediocre to me but after they got alot better in the next release..but yeah after SA gta4 was definitely a dowgrade could already see how they got a bit better in the dlc but next gta better be a good one!!

pixelsword2704d ago

I don't have a problem with people scoring games, sometimes devs don't put out a demo, and some people can't afford to buy games or rent them to the point that they can take a chance. I have issues with consistency from sites that will sink games by making issues over little things like the death sequence from Too Human (solution: don't die so much) whilst ignoring Too Human had no loading throughout the whole game and played very smooth despite the stiff animations of the character (quite impressive, even by today's standards); or games that are really good but are innovative to the point that it might take an investment of time to learn (Lair).

Or when they do fanboy reviews like they tried to nit-pick GT5 and act like it was not much to the game, but will never do a comparison between GT5 and other games because that game was so jam-packed with stuff. Also, when a website that only reviewed car-sim games said that GT5 was the best looking game on consoles of the PC, some reviewers still tried to knock down GT5 despite not showing video side-by-side examples of how the graphics were inferior to another game, despite their rants.

Blaze9292704d ago

i dont see the point. after reading/watching a review, it should be clear how the game is and the reader/viewer should be able to come to a decision on their own and not based off a score.

That's why I like N/A review scores.

Dravidian2704d ago (Edited 2704d ago )

I used to agree with you(about watching videos) until a few days ago. I watched an IGN review of the PSP modnations Racers and it looked horrible due to (almost completely) looking slow. Then when I randomly decided to watch some you tube videos I found out the the IGN reviewer simply sucked at the game. The players in the Youtube videos were tearing the track up.

That being said I now look for multiple videos from different sources.

As far as reading is concerned, its still god to get multiple sources. If a reviewer says that something is unresponsive, there's a good chance that they have crap timing.

matrix462704d ago

Personally I enjoyed GTA IV greatly. I also believe a lot of people had their expectations too high. How could Rockstar top a game like San Andreas? I think A lot of people just wanted more side missions, weapons, And just generally more mayhem. I enjoy the series for the stories (I must be in the minority in that respect).

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2704d ago
fossilfern2704d ago

Maybe a system like, Buy, Rent, Don't Buy, would be a good system. Think some sites use it

armycore2704d ago

You still get the same result because most people treat scores the same way. High scoring games = Buy, mid scoring = rent, low scoring = don't buy. Same thing. I'm a proponent for scores, but I do understand the legitimate reason for not having a score in a review: it makes people actually read the review to know if the reviewer likes the game or not. Too bad those that don't do scores in their review are so pretentious about the whole thing.

kyl2772704d ago

Scoring games works fine in theory but people do it wrong.

If a game doesn't get 9.5 or above people are up in arms and say the site is looking for hits and this affects the way te site reviews as they are under that pressure even though 7 and above is good.

tplarkin72704d ago (Edited 2704d ago )

Many sites claim 5 (50%) and above is good. That's a problem.

There are two systems in place that everyone understands. The four star system that uses 1/2 star units. And the 100 percent scale where 70 percent and above is good.

These are the only two systems that should be used. Attempting something different only leads to miscommunication.

Kee2704d ago

Yeah, a point system reflects taste so someone might not even like a 10/10 game. It may be a 10/10 to the person playing it but if you don't like that genre you wouldn't to enjoy it.

A scoring system is necessary to indicate quality at a glance, I suppose to people who don't have time to read reviews. People might just want to read the pros and cons and see the final score and a lot of sites do that. I like that method.

EditorAtGNG2704d ago

Kotaku used that (among other sites) and it worked great for those who couldn't be bothered to read the actual review. Still, a combination of both (reading the review and the addition of major pros/cons) would be best.

Show all comments (21)