Adam Sessler versus Review Scores

[Soviet Heavy]

You might recall that last week I made a thread about G4 gave Uncharted 3 a 4/5. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.319767-G4-Gives-Uncharted-3-a-4-5-Madness-Ensues]

If you don't, it was the thread with this video, railing against psychotic fanboys.

Anyways, it seems as though Adam has had enough. After the chaos on the G4 comments section, his latest Soapbox talks about how he is fed up with the entire system.
http://www.g4tv.com/videos/55954/sesslers-soapbox-i-hate-numbers/

And honestly, I agree with him. I know that this has little discussion value beyond a recap of last week's thread, but I thought you'd like to see the response from the man himself.

EDIT
For those of you having trouble viewing the second video, try using this link instead. The loading problems are on the G4 site, not the video player.
http://n4g.com/news/874130/sesslers-soapbox-i-hate-numbers

 

[StriderShinryu]

As with many game related topics, Sessler is bang on here. Sticking a final review number on anything really does do a disservice to whatever is being reviewed.

 

[DannyJBeckett]

I disagree with a lot of what he says but I loved the video anyway. Hilariously early on in the video he makes fun of the X.X scoring system which I myself am a vocal fan of and use for my crappy little album reviews on my blog no one reads.

Kinda the same here. I do a review blog and I use a rating system, but I understand why people don't like it. I think the problem comes from the way anything below 7.5 is considered 'below average ' by certain organizations.

 

[Outright Villainy]

I most definitely agree with him, and that was a very enjoyable rant.

This is generally why I prefer reviews from sites like Rock Paper Shotgun, where along with the higher quality of writing in general, they specifically never give a score. I never give any scores on any review I've written for myself either, and I balked at when I had to give one for a piece in a college paper. (but hey, getting published, I'm not going to complain that much.)

 

[DustyDrB]

I've been saying this for years. People just need to take a minute to read and glean what they will from the reviewer's words.

 

[ResonanceGames]

I almost never agree with Sessler's reviews, but his soapbox series is great. Though it is kind of stupid to tell people to raise the level of discourse, then not ten seconds later tell them to shove their dicks in their mouths.

 

[Red-Link]

Adam has been railing against numbered reviews pretty much since he started working. Honestly, I love Adam. I know a lot of people hate him and G4 and X-Play and what-have-you, but the Soapbox is always awesome and while I don't always agree with his reviews, he's always open with his prejudices, which is more than most can say. The hatred of numbered reviews is just another feather in his cap.

 

[viranimus]

Well I dont see blaming metacritic in this because the number system itself is not inherently a bad thing. I mean whats the superior alternative? Also keep in mind you have to deal with a group of people who cant be bothered to read a paragraph and a half, so they spawned the whole TL;DR thing. SO can you really expect the average person to be able to handle something more advanced than a simple at a glance nuemerical scale?

In those circumstances, metacritic is the best of the evils before us. Its not the numbers fault, its the idiots who take the shit too seriously. Another of humanities stupid traits, The need for excessive statistical micromanagement.

I do get what hes saying and yes what he is saying is pretty spot on, but the problem is, to make it so as that is no longer an issue, you in essence have to completely modify human nature and how many people have had a lot of luck doing that thus far?

I worry for him, honestly because he was so worked up in that last video that, you can tell his blood pressure is through the roof. His truth and passion might be right, but it seems likely that it will prolly kill him in the long run.

 

[Red-Link]

Well I dont see blaming metacritic in this because the number system itself is not inherently a bad thing. I mean whats the superior alternative? Also keep in mind you have to deal with a group of people who cant be bothered to read a paragraph and a half, so they spawned the whole TL;DR thing.

In those circumstances, metacritic is the best of the evils before us. Its not the numbers fault, its the idiots who take the shit too seriously. Another of humanities stupid traits, The need for excessive statistical micromanagement.

I do get what hes saying and yes what he is saying is pretty spot on, but the problem is, to make it so as that is no longer an issue, you in essence have to completely modify human nature and how many people have had a lot of luck doing that thus far?

I worry for him, honestly because he was so worked up in that last video that, you can tell his blood pressure is through the roof. His truth and passion might be right, but it seems likely that it will prolly kill him in the long run.

With regards to Metacritic, while I mostly agree that if we have to deal with numbers, an aggregation is not a bad idea, but remember, Metacritic runs on a 100 point score. This means that other ranges have to be altered. A high 3 out of 5 is still a 60 on Metacritic instead of a 70 (7 out of 10 generally being considered average). Therefore, if you are unfamiliar with the rating system and see the adjusted score on Metacritic, it can give a false impression. That being said, I use Metacritic a lot for a base idea of things and move to full-text if I'm interested enough.

 

[viranimus]

Well I dont see blaming metacritic in this because the number system itself is not inherently a bad thing. I mean whats the superior alternative? Also keep in mind you have to deal with a group of people who cant be bothered to read a paragraph and a half, so they spawned the whole TL;DR thing.

In those circumstances, metacritic is the best of the evils before us. Its not the numbers fault, its the idiots who take the shit too seriously. Another of humanities stupid traits, The need for excessive statistical micromanagement.

I do get what hes saying and yes what he is saying is pretty spot on, but the problem is, to make it so as that is no longer an issue, you in essence have to completely modify human nature and how many people have had a lot of luck doing that thus far?

I worry for him, honestly because he was so worked up in that last video that, you can tell his blood pressure is through the roof. His truth and passion might be right, but it seems likely that it will prolly kill him in the long run.

With regards to Metacritic, while I mostly agree that if we have to deal with numbers, an aggregation is not a bad idea, but remember, Metacritic runs on a 100 point score. This means that other ranges have to be altered. A high 3 out of 5 is still a 60 on Metacritic instead of a 70 (7 out of 10 generally being considered average). Therefore, if you are unfamiliar with the rating system and see the adjusted score on Metacritic, it can give a false impression. That being said, I use Metacritic a lot for a base idea of things and move to full-text if I'm interested enough.

True enough but you got to ask yourself, is it the numbers fault that the average person cant seem to differentiate the 0-100 scale of metacritic and the 0-100 scale most people are familiar with in the educational grading system that mandates only 70% or greater is tolerable.

Its not really a failing of the system.. its a failing of the people and human nature that causes this to be a greater problem than it should be. And honestly its that failure that ness. the need for a system like a numerical + aggregator one to exist.

 

[Shadowstar38]

Yes. Point well taken. This started to piss me off when Gameinformer gave the PC version a .25 higher grade than the console version. What does that 1/4 of a point mean?

A universal Buy, Rent, Throw it in the toilet system works better.

 

[Red-Link]

True enough but you got to ask yourself, is it the numbers fault that the average person cant seem to differentiate the 0-100 scale of metacritic and the 0-100 scale most people are familiar with in the educational grading system that mandates only 70% or greater is tolerable.

Its not really a failing of the system.. its a failing of the people and human nature that causes this to be a greater problem than it should be. And honestly its that failure that ness. the need for a system like a numerical + aggregator one to exist.

I get what you're saying, and I even agree with you to an extent. The lackadaisical methods of most people, especially if they're interest in something is just passing, is the source of the problem. Despite that I still kind of feel like the number system can cause problems. When I use Metacritic, I tend to focus more on the color. It's still a quantity, but it provides a more basic view of support (like thumbs-up and thumbs-down). By making the range smaller, you can tell the difference between a recommendation more easily. Is a 7.5 recommended or not? A thumbs-down isn't. Granted this means you really need to remember that reviewers are humans and have their own opinions, but it works for me.

Because that got kind of long, I should note that it isn't an argument against you, I agree with what you said for the most part (my only real lack of agreement is that it necessitates the system). I just wanted to present an alternate method of looking at reviews.

 

[RaikuFA]

This is the same idiot who lumps every jrpg as garbage and thinks every fps is a godsend.

His point is moot.

EDIT: Thats Tommy Tallarico I was reffering to, not Sessler, my bad(although I could've sworn hes done that as well, just going "This game sucks because it's a jrpg.). He still reeks douche in my POV for saying anyone who likes Megaman is an idiot.

 

[Snotnarok]

I agree, I've seen so many people get all pissy because someone gave a game a higher rating than another. How does it even factor into someones thick stupid brain that you can compare games like that? First off regardless of what's said or thought likes and dislikes for games are subjective, so whatever someone says about a game will only influence me to buy or not buy not how I feel of something overall.

Secondly? If you're sitting there saying Gears is better than Halo or Uncharted, whatever you're stating your subjective thoughts on it, your opinion. But if you are stating this as like cold hard fact or whatever that's just insanity, but also getting mad at the person for that is just as crazy. Because who cares what that person thinks? It's a review it doesn't change anything for you, if you enjoy it then great! What's their thoughts gonna do for you in the long run. There's better things to be pissed off at.

 

[Savagezion]

Bah, I agree with some and disagree with some. The number is "supposed" to be there to reflect integrity in the product. The problem is the integrity of the system is constantly on trial, not the product itself. For the most part, the scores assigned to games are justifiable scores. No one in business of reviewing is giving games like Halo a 4 and/or G.I.Joe: Rise of Cobra a 9. You may rank it differently but usually user reviews and professional reviews average out about the same at most being off by 1 point one way or the other. The fact that people are actually squabbling over that 1 point is insane because the integrity of the system is still intact as it is a system to quantify subjective material and yet everyone seems to be in agreement as whole.

So while I do understand his displeasure of numbered scores, there is integrity in there. He just has the misfortune of having to deal with the part of the public that scrutinize the integrity of the system. (That IS there.)

Scores are more like a "ballpark estimate" not an exact science. You can't quantify subjective material precisely and to expect someone to do it for the general public is just as ridiculous as saying there is no value in the system whatsoever.

 

[FilipJPhry]

A universal Buy, Rent, Throw it in the toilet system works better.

This. So much. Just add a disclaimer about which genre/platform the game/DVD is categorized in, and watch the fanboys lose their shit no matter the outcome.

Sidenote: I haven't watched G4 since it became a "Jack-ass channel" around 3 or 4 years ago, but I always found X-Play's reviews very thoughtful and credible. I remember Sessler awarding Assassin's Creed GoTY one time, and he had to go on Attack of the Show the next day to defend his selection against Kevin Peirrera, who argued that Fallout 3 or Left 4 Dead should have won. It was his decision, goddammit!