Amnestic said:
RagTagBand said:
literally jizzing everywhere
Literally jizzing everywhere? Oh dear, that must be quite a mess. I hope they clean up after themselves.
Ohhh, the weird things gamers say...
Ours is the only demographic that celebrates premature ejaculation.
weker said:
in my books any game that gives a 10/10 losses all credibility for me, this is due to a 10 meaning perfection, the strange thing is a 5/5 does not mean perfection for many. for me personally and others I think, feel that a 5/5 always means a 9, this removes the possibly of the game being described as perfect.
In short 10/10 perfect
5/5 a really good game
Edit: thought about it some more, it may be due to the reduced scale that you can apply less exaggerated scores.
such as
1= really bad
2= bad
3= average (this tends to be more accurate)
4= good game
5 very good game
but the main issue is with 1/10 scores as they also have their average messed up
5= crap
6= not very good
7= meh
8= average
9= good
10= mass rage and confusing over what it means
in short scores out of 10 don't work anymore as people are crazy
I'm not a fan of scores (it creates the illusion of objectivity over what is really just an opinion), but they aren't going anywhere. This is my made-up-off-the-top-of-my-head view on a ten point scale:
1-3: A mess in every aspect. The flaws are everywhere, from the technical aspects to the gameplay to the story. For 1's, there is seemingly no redeeming aspect of the game. For 2's and 3's, some aspects may be functional but do little to save the experience. These are as universally unappealing as games can be.
4-5: Still a heavily flawed game, but it can still please enough of an audience so that it's not negligible. There might be only one strong characteristic in the game, and the rest might be awful. For some, that one strong characteristic makes it a worthwhile play.
6-7: As average a game as you will see released. It could be a good game that is dragged down by poor polish (bugs, bad visuals, etc). It could simply be a thoroughly unspectacular game in any way (a game that won't annoy, won't thrill, but will probably bore you and make you wish you were playing something else). It could be a very shallow game that does something well, but won't maintain your interest long.
8: A good game that has definite flaws that can't be overlooked. Maybe the core experience is fantastic but gets dull and repetitive over extended sittings. Maybe it has a few bugs that will annoy you during an otherwise highly enjoyable playthrough. This is the kind of game that you want to come back to, but want to give it a good bit of time so its flaws won't irritate you so much.
9: An all around great experience that stands out above the rest in its genre. There are flaws, but they are negligible. These are polished games with thoroughly enjoyable gameplay. It's also probably a game you can play again and again.
10: An instant classic. A perfect score doesn't imply a perfect game, as there still may be a few issues. The difference between a 9 and a 10 to me is that a 10 is much more memorable. It's an unforgettable experience that raises the bar for its genre.
Now why do scores in the 1-3 range tend to not be seen so much? Because they die before they hit the market. They would do more damage to a company's reputation than is worth the few measly sales they might accumulate. They are truly failed games.
And even in the 4-6 range, we don't see that much in gaming media. Or we don't see it being
reviewed. This, to me, accounts for a lot of the shovelware and shallow kid's games that are being released. There are a ton of them, but gaming outlets generally don't waste the time talking about them. Their target audience isn't likely to be reading even the most popular gaming magazine or website. They get their recommendations for parenting magazines or something similar.
