Metacritic needs to change!

[cormacd12]

It's clear that our 7-10 game review scale leads to highly inflated review scores. I believe Metacritic should introduce an A-Fgrading system to compensate for this. Let me demonstrate with some of this year's games:

A: 92-100. A definite GOTY contender. Only minor flaws detract from an excellent game.
e.g. Skyrim, Portal 2, Arkham City and Skyrim

B: 85-91. A polished, well-made game let down by some poor design choices or lack of originality.
e.g. Modern Warfare 3, Dead Space 2, Gears of War 3, Battlefield 3 (PC)

C: 76-85. Overall, an enjoyable if slightly disappointing game. But has frustrating sections, narrative shortcomings, etc.
e.g. Bulletstorm, RAGE, Warhammer 40K: Space Marines, Sonic: Generations

D: 65-75. A somewhat tedious game, with serious flaws that may turn some palyers off.
e.g. Alice: Madness Returns, Deadly Premonition, El Shaddai, Red Faction: Armageddon.

F: 0-64. A downright terrible game. A disappointment and an unmitigated failure.
e.g. Duke Nukem Forever, Call of Juarez: The Cartel, Bodycount, X-Men: Destiny.


What do you think? Is this system fair/accurate?

 

[mrblakemiller]

I'm not sure what the benefit of switching from one system of grading to another would be, but I like your descriptions and examples. I think it would be better if graders just embraced the whole of the spectrum. Why don't we decide on one game from all of gaming histroy that perfectly embodies the "1 out of 10," the "2 out of 10," all the way up, so we can understand what these numbers mean in relation to each other?

 

[Grottnikk]

I think they should change it to my personal system:

3 = I liked it
2 = meh
1 = crap

 

[Nfritzappa]

I like the system.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

How about "Buy, Rent, Trashcan?"

 

[Lt. Vinciti]

It's clear that our 7-10 game review scale leads to highly inflated review scores. I believe Metacritic should introduce an A-Fgrading system to compensate for this. Let me demonstrate with some of this year's games:

A: 92-100. A definite GOTY contender. Only minor flaws detract from an excellent game.
e.g. Skyrim, Portal 2, Arkham City and Skyrim

B: 85-91. A polished, well-made game let down by some poor design choices or lack of originality.
e.g. Modern Warfare 3, Dead Space 2, Gears of War 3, Battlefield 3 (PC)

C: 76-85. Overall, an enjoyable if slightly disappointing game. But has frustrating sections, narrative shortcomings, etc.
e.g. Bulletstorm, RAGE, Warhammer 40K: Space Marines, Sonic: Generations

D: 65-75. A somewhat tedious game, with serious flaws that may turn some palyers off.
e.g. Alice: Madness Returns, Deadly Premonition, El Shaddai, Red Faction: Armageddon.

F: 0-64. A downright terrible game. A disappointment and an unmitigated failure.
e.g. Duke Nukem Forever, Call of Juarez: The Cartel, Bodycount, X-Men: Destiny.


What do you think? Is this system fair/accurate?

Looks at example and example games...

This shit couldnt be any more perfect if your deity of choice was rating them

 

[Mojo]

It's clear that our 7-10 game review scale leads to highly inflated review scores. I believe Metacritic should introduce an A-Fgrading system to compensate for this. Let me demonstrate with some of this year's games:

A: 92-100. A definite GOTY contender. Only minor flaws detract from an excellent game.
e.g. Skyrim, Portal 2, Arkham City and Skyrim

B: 85-91. A polished, well-made game let down by some poor design choices or lack of originality.
e.g. Modern Warfare 3, Dead Space 2, Gears of War 3, Battlefield 3 (PC)

C: 76-85. Overall, an enjoyable if slightly disappointing game. But has frustrating sections, narrative shortcomings, etc.
e.g. Bulletstorm, RAGE, Warhammer 40K: Space Marines, Sonic: Generations

D: 65-75. A somewhat tedious game, with serious flaws that may turn some palyers off.
e.g. Alice: Madness Returns, Deadly Premonition, El Shaddai, Red Faction: Armageddon.

F: 0-64. A downright terrible game. A disappointment and an unmitigated failure.
e.g. Duke Nukem Forever, Call of Juarez: The Cartel, Bodycount, X-Men: Destiny.


What do you think? Is this system fair/accurate?

Well, I guess its a good idea in general, but it does have some flwas too.
There is a big difference between a game that gets a 64 and a 0 score.
I think you cant put them in the same category. (In this case "F")
Also in this system DNF gets a F but Red Faction a D.
Readers will see this as a much bigger difference then a game that gets a 64 and one that gets a 65.

EDIT:
And if your system is introduced, wouldnt it just lead to Metacritic using the same rating system and just hiding the numbers and adding letters?

 

[number2301]

How about we just do what PC Gamer at least used to do? 90+ all time classic, 80-89 excellent, 70-79 very good, 60-69 decent, 50-59 one for genre fans, less than 50 varying degrees of rubbish.

Looking at that it's only actually an extension from 7-10 to 5-10 but it was a hell of a lot more credible. I really cannot get used to modern review scoring.

 

[omega 616]

It's clear that our 7-10 game review scale leads to highly inflated review scores. I believe Metacritic should introduce an A-Fgrading system to compensate for this. Let me demonstrate with some of this year's games:

A: 92-100. A definite GOTY contender. Only minor flaws detract from an excellent game.
e.g. Skyrim, Portal 2, Arkham City and Skyrim

B: 85-91. A polished, well-made game let down by some poor design choices or lack of originality.
e.g. Modern Warfare 3, Dead Space 2, Gears of War 3, Battlefield 3 (PC)

C: 76-85. Overall, an enjoyable if slightly disappointing game. But has frustrating sections, narrative shortcomings, etc.
e.g. Bulletstorm, RAGE, Warhammer 40K: Space Marines, Sonic: Generations

D: 65-75. A somewhat tedious game, with serious flaws that may turn some palyers off.
e.g. Alice: Madness Returns, Deadly Premonition, El Shaddai, Red Faction: Armageddon.

F: 0-64. A downright terrible game. A disappointment and an unmitigated failure.
e.g. Duke Nukem Forever, Call of Juarez: The Cartel, Bodycount, X-Men: Destiny.


What do you think? Is this system fair/accurate?

I was thinking more of a
"yeah it's good"
"needs work"
"only for true fans"
"what happened?"

I say that 'cos "A definite GOTY contender. Only minor flaws detract from an excellent game.....Portal 2, Arkham City" Not to me they aren't ...

Numbers and letters are too vague, if somebody can look at a page with a wall of text and a number or letter in the corner, they are always going to look at the number/letter rather than read why it has the score it has.

Which means bribes and "we wont let you review our future games unless you give us B/8 or above", if you just have a break down of pro's and cons it will lead to better reviews and more informed choices.

 

[Kotep]

The problem with Metacritic's rating systems is that they take all ratings as if they're on a strict percentage scale. People who particularly use, say, stars to avoid the point inflation you get from using numerical scores, have their scores graded out of 100 the same as someone who uses a ten point scale with decimals. So while someone might give a game they thought was pretty good but not that remarkable 'three stars out of five', someone doing a numeric score of a game wouldn't likely score a game they thought was enjoyable but not exceptional a 6.0.

And they won't weight their scale, even if you're a reviewer and you ask them to change it because that's not how your grades work.