I'm glad to see I'm not the only one infuriated by 7 or 8 out of ten being considered "average," rather than a 5 out of ten.
Jimquisition: Hate Out Of Ten
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Recommended Videos
"Games as a medium with critical consideration is extreme young? Games have been reviewed as long as games have been around. Ever heard of PC Gamer? It's a review magazine that's been around since 1993.
Computer Gaming World, now discontinued, was in print since 1981."
And Plato talked about theater, Shakespeare had his critics, and im sure that shortly after someone banged on some rocks in rhythm, the guy next to him made known what he thought of it. In the grand scheme of things, 30 years ago is downright infantile, and im going to say that to this day, Games still have a ways to go before they have a critical language that facilitates constructive review.
"You're assuming that the education system in areas outside your own use the letter grade system. As far as my education was concerned, letters stopped in grade 8. After that it was out of a 100."
In other words, you, like most everyone else, have an intuitive understanding of this system
"I wasn't complaining I was merely stating the obvious that reviewing a game, and giving a school grade are not the same thing. The standards even for school differ at varying degrees of education. In elementary you need what, a 50 to pass? In university, or at least the one I went to you need a 65% or a 70% in my degree program. If you want to "pass" to get into one of the other schools like law or medicine your passing grade is even higher. And then on top of that some education systems in the US uses some grades on the 4.0 scale or something.
Obviously for you, you equate to school marks but personally I never have. And given how variable education systems are, equating it to school marks is inferring more than is actually there.
50/100 is average because on the bell curve, 50 is in the middle. That's it."
First off, the details differ, absolutely. The exact cutoff points for grades varies a bit. But the very general point of the grading systems remains the same. Reviewing is an inexact science, and whether passing is 65 or 70 is not a significant enough difference to be noticeable. And yes, my school had a scale going up to 4. However, this score was calculated by adding up letter grades, where the excellent grades led to a good GPA, and a more middling GPA comes from...thats right...the C range, 7-8 out of 10, 70%-80%.
You say that other people don't view these scores as I do, yet the context of the majority of these views agrees with me. In most reviews, a qualitative description that seems to be describing a letter grade of B will probably get a numerical score in the 8's. Below 60, and they will likely talk about how the game needs to be avoided at all costs. If they are not thinking of letter grades directly, they are certainly thinking of a measure that corresponds with letter grade nearly perfectly. Which for all intents and purposes, is functionally identical to a letter grade.
And lastly, that is not the middle of a bell curve. That would be a bell curve assuming that a test full of true/false answers were answered by a class at random. That is a bell curve if the scores were picked at random. Were students to pick at random in a multiple choice test, the bell curve would peak at 25. In both reviews and grades, the bell curve peaks more towards a little above 70. Saying that 50 is the center of the bell curve is arbitrary and lacks meaningful context.
Computer Gaming World, now discontinued, was in print since 1981."
And Plato talked about theater, Shakespeare had his critics, and im sure that shortly after someone banged on some rocks in rhythm, the guy next to him made known what he thought of it. In the grand scheme of things, 30 years ago is downright infantile, and im going to say that to this day, Games still have a ways to go before they have a critical language that facilitates constructive review.
"You're assuming that the education system in areas outside your own use the letter grade system. As far as my education was concerned, letters stopped in grade 8. After that it was out of a 100."
In other words, you, like most everyone else, have an intuitive understanding of this system
"I wasn't complaining I was merely stating the obvious that reviewing a game, and giving a school grade are not the same thing. The standards even for school differ at varying degrees of education. In elementary you need what, a 50 to pass? In university, or at least the one I went to you need a 65% or a 70% in my degree program. If you want to "pass" to get into one of the other schools like law or medicine your passing grade is even higher. And then on top of that some education systems in the US uses some grades on the 4.0 scale or something.
Obviously for you, you equate to school marks but personally I never have. And given how variable education systems are, equating it to school marks is inferring more than is actually there.
50/100 is average because on the bell curve, 50 is in the middle. That's it."
First off, the details differ, absolutely. The exact cutoff points for grades varies a bit. But the very general point of the grading systems remains the same. Reviewing is an inexact science, and whether passing is 65 or 70 is not a significant enough difference to be noticeable. And yes, my school had a scale going up to 4. However, this score was calculated by adding up letter grades, where the excellent grades led to a good GPA, and a more middling GPA comes from...thats right...the C range, 7-8 out of 10, 70%-80%.
You say that other people don't view these scores as I do, yet the context of the majority of these views agrees with me. In most reviews, a qualitative description that seems to be describing a letter grade of B will probably get a numerical score in the 8's. Below 60, and they will likely talk about how the game needs to be avoided at all costs. If they are not thinking of letter grades directly, they are certainly thinking of a measure that corresponds with letter grade nearly perfectly. Which for all intents and purposes, is functionally identical to a letter grade.
And lastly, that is not the middle of a bell curve. That would be a bell curve assuming that a test full of true/false answers were answered by a class at random. That is a bell curve if the scores were picked at random. Were students to pick at random in a multiple choice test, the bell curve would peak at 25. In both reviews and grades, the bell curve peaks more towards a little above 70. Saying that 50 is the center of the bell curve is arbitrary and lacks meaningful context.
No apparently its 7... for some reason...Rex Dark said:
Personally as someone trying to become an artist I hate the idea of perfection. Its what we should strive for but acheiving it will cause many people to stop trying and things to become stagnent. I SPIT ON PERFECTION!!!
And yet, you still don't answer the question of just WHAT a game that got a 9 and one that got an 8.5 did 50% better?Feylynn said:
It makes no sense whats so ever and just further complicates the scoring system by bloating it with pointless, unquantifiable, dribble. Same thing goes with giving something a 9.75, it's 75% towards a perfect 10? Well then whats the 25% holding it back? Why not just a 9? Whats next? A 9.77777777755591928310957759012313? It adds nothing of value to the review.
Sure you can say it's a minor annoyance, like a camera freaking out, but if it's minor, why make it hold any sway over the score? Just mention it and move on.
8 out of 10.
For that awesome ending!
Don't normally like these videos as I could imagine in the real world I wouldn't get on with someone so opinionated. Probably because I am too I suppose... But this was actually a good watch. I think that scores are taken too seriously. That being said there have been a number of games this season that haven't deserved the scores they have got.
For that awesome ending!
Don't normally like these videos as I could imagine in the real world I wouldn't get on with someone so opinionated. Probably because I am too I suppose... But this was actually a good watch. I think that scores are taken too seriously. That being said there have been a number of games this season that haven't deserved the scores they have got.
The grading is done in context of current trends, technologies and possibilities. So a game that is way better than it's predecessor but gets a lower score does not mean it's seen as being 'worse'. It's just seen as "not innovative enough for the current generation".
Though the opening words to his episodes have sometimes made me cringe I have always watched and enjoyed the Jimquisition; yet this is my favourite episode by far. An 8 is a great score, so I am happy he has at least given some the chance to see how silly it is to think otherwise. I have always shook my head at 'gamers' who think a 6 or 7 is unplayable - if you like the genre it's a good game for you.
Though I believe the text of a review should not substitute a score, I have always thought a review should consider a 5 as average. With 6 good, 7 very good, 8 great, 9 unmissable if you like the genre and 10 - buy the bloody system.
Though I believe the text of a review should not substitute a score, I have always thought a review should consider a 5 as average. With 6 good, 7 very good, 8 great, 9 unmissable if you like the genre and 10 - buy the bloody system.
Jim, although I don't ALWAYS agree with you - you've made a damn good point. No game is perfect and no game is worth 100% (10/10). There are great games, phenomenal titles that have been released and they do not score 10/10 because if you were to have a 10/10 game, you wouldn't need to BUY another one, would you? If there is room for improvement or room for addition without being the jack of all trades and master of nothing (GTA4) - then there wouldn't be room for sequels, re-releases or any other competition. I mean, what would be the point of releasing a game after releasing the PERFECT game? How do you follow up with that? You can't. And its not like developers aren't pushing as hard as they can to make good quality products, but the industry still has room for improvement and can therefore indefinitely be defined as a "Work in progress".
Anyone feels like saying that I'm wrong here, then just post the date when games stop being developed. We'll have a winner then ;P My money is on Halo 88.8/10 - History of Chief's Helmet
Anyone feels like saying that I'm wrong here, then just post the date when games stop being developed. We'll have a winner then ;P My money is on Halo 88.8/10 - History of Chief's Helmet
In fact, why even have ten? Why not just have a score of one or zero? Anything else complicates things too much and leads to unquantifiable dribble. I mean, WHAT does a 10 game have that a 9 game does not?Qitz said:
Unfortunately, the grading context is also done in the context of the current grading context A9nd redundancy would be redundant). Which means dealing with the notion that an improved sequel HAS to have a better score, because publications have played that game. once you start making concessions like this and score inflation, it's kind of hard to undo. People will always look back and say "but you have X a Y, so Z should be >Y.John the Gamer said:
The difference is the 87 is significantly better than the 86. It could mean the difference between Bad company 2 and crysis 2 (and I happen to agree with user score that Bad company 2 is the better game).mjc0961 said:
If you can buy only one, go with BC2.
On the 4 point scale we effectively have nowadays there is alot of contrast between 8 and 9.
I reckon that if you can point out the better game of 2 games, you should always be able to reflect this in the score.
That's why decimals are a good thing.
And I reckon that if you can discern what you personally like and have similar products to compare, then you can always rank them and if you can rank them, you can can also justify as many score gradations as you have items, until you get to the point where you can nolonger tell the difference yourself.
I don't think all above average shooters ever made, need to share only 3 positions between them. I see alot more contrast in quality and fun than that.
Thank goodness someone is standing up for a bit of common damn sense.
I use movie reviews because most film critics still have the gumption to get raked over the coals by angry fan boys because the critic did not proclaim the film to be the greatest film ever made. When a film comes along that gets over 95% on Rotten Tomatoes I know it really has something going for it. A 70% film I know will have some flaws but it's still enjoyable even with the little flaws.
I'm not always looking for the perfect game so I'd like to know if a game has a few small flaws instead of everything getting a 10 out 10 to make fans happy. I agree that 10 out 10 needs to be for the games that really go beyond what we are used to.
I use movie reviews because most film critics still have the gumption to get raked over the coals by angry fan boys because the critic did not proclaim the film to be the greatest film ever made. When a film comes along that gets over 95% on Rotten Tomatoes I know it really has something going for it. A 70% film I know will have some flaws but it's still enjoyable even with the little flaws.
I'm not always looking for the perfect game so I'd like to know if a game has a few small flaws instead of everything getting a 10 out 10 to make fans happy. I agree that 10 out 10 needs to be for the games that really go beyond what we are used to.
I'm not usually one to like Jim Sterling's point of view, but he's bang on with this one; if Skyrim got 8 out of 10 from somewhere (which I doubt few reviewers would have the balls to do so after all the hype), they would be lynched, even though they might have valid reservations about the game (note I've not actually played it yet, but will soonish).
PCGamer, whose reviewing I've enjoyed for a while now has a nice system where bad is only 45% or less; I've played quite a few games they rated as 60% or lower and enjoyed them; they make it clear the game isn't great, but you can have fun with it. They only hand out 90+ to a handful of games; I like the fact that they do that because it makes 90% or more feel special; you get the impression they loved the game and will likely be playing it in the office on and off for months, maybe even years to come.
Not to say I think they're always right; Portal 2 got 94% and I disagree its worth that, but my criteria for whether a game is good or not will be different to theirs; when fanboys realise that, we'll all be better for it. At the same time I think reviewers really need to get more critical, else how can we hope for improvement?
PCGamer, whose reviewing I've enjoyed for a while now has a nice system where bad is only 45% or less; I've played quite a few games they rated as 60% or lower and enjoyed them; they make it clear the game isn't great, but you can have fun with it. They only hand out 90+ to a handful of games; I like the fact that they do that because it makes 90% or more feel special; you get the impression they loved the game and will likely be playing it in the office on and off for months, maybe even years to come.
Not to say I think they're always right; Portal 2 got 94% and I disagree its worth that, but my criteria for whether a game is good or not will be different to theirs; when fanboys realise that, we'll all be better for it. At the same time I think reviewers really need to get more critical, else how can we hope for improvement?
Damn good point, I've always thought that 5 outta 10 shouldn't actually be average, but never really could explain why.Xanadu84 said:
If you take 5 outta 10 as 'does half of what it should do right', then sure, most stuff should do better than that.
Someone who gets half an exam right, isn't average, they're pretty bad.
In short tho, 7 out of 10 is considered average, right or wrong, and we're gonna have to accept that.
Of course EVERYONE wants the thing they've worked hard for years to create to get perfect, 10/10 reviews across the board, but that's not going to happen for most people.
as is, I consider 8/10 to be something that's pretty good for its genre, and I'd not rule out buying a 6/10 game if it interested me.
Last of all, everyone should remember, it's a single reviewer's opinion. Someone could give the next big RTS 11/10 across the board in every category, and I'd not go buy it, as RTS just doesn't do it for me. (I admit I might try the demo if there was one however, in case I really was missing out - more reasons to release a demo, folks!)
I'd suggest I've probably got some 3 and 4/10 games in my collection that I love, but I'd not rate em as 9/10s because they're only great to me.
Fucking epic ending...
I have noticed people getting rialed at scores that are not perfect, but honestly some of these big budget games merit only a 5/10. I'm no gears fan, nor God of War, so I would be the ass who would give those games only average scores. I guess people would crucify me for that... huh? All for an opinion which is supposedly protected by law.
I have noticed people getting rialed at scores that are not perfect, but honestly some of these big budget games merit only a 5/10. I'm no gears fan, nor God of War, so I would be the ass who would give those games only average scores. I guess people would crucify me for that... huh? All for an opinion which is supposedly protected by law.
Not 50%, 5%.Qitz said:
9/10 is 90% - 8.5/10 is 85%.
This is very simple math and it is the answer to your question: "Just what the hell is the difference between a 8.5 and a 9?"
The answer is 5 %, that is the difference(From Dictionary.com
Difference: 7a. the result of the subtraction of one number, quantity, etc, from another)
90-85=5.
A game that got 9.75 isn't 75% closer to perfect then a 9.0 because you can't discount the initial 9.
But my real point is that you are in favor of using more simplistic numbers to avoid using 'meaningless' decimals to represent percentages in between 10 point intervals, I was joking that following that logic we might as well just jump to the logical simplest scoring system.
1 or 0.
Good or Bad.
2-10 doesn't more adequately express the end game of "Whether or not the consumer should buy it" Right?
Decimals are an easy way to represent the basics of a full 100 point scale without inflating the numbers and getting into even more silly things like 83.4% or something truly unnecessarily technical.