Only a 9.3/10 - Fanboys! Also: 100% scores?

[Zombie_King]

people shouldnt take ratings seriously its just the opinion of another person

Can't say it better. Of course, I think Fallout 3 deserves a 12/10, but that's just my opinion. If you don't like Fallout 3, you've probably got good evidence to back it up, and there's no need to take time out of my day to convince you otherwise.

I agree that nothing deserves a perfect score except Ocarina of Time

Ocarina of Time doesn't deserve a 10/10. No game is, and will ever be perfect. Saying something is perfect is a contradiction by itself. You think it's perfect, but your neighbor might think it's a turd sandwich.

 

[Woodsey]

On a side note, does anyone else agree that 100% and 10/10 scores don't exist? No game is perfect, so don't score it so.

Well, I think if you have scores, be they percentages or marks out of 10, the top score has to be there. I have never actually seen a game get a 100%, though I know Edge Magazine have a given a few games 10/10, though such a score is of course not indicative of a game being completely perfect, perhaps merely that it's flaws are so small they are barely worth registering as a whole. As long as such a score is back up by reasoning for why it received said score, it's fine by me. You're not going to find out whetehr you should invest in a game based solely on a percentage scoring or a mark out of 10.

After all, as was said, no game is perfect. Even Super Mario Galaxy. Can anyone remember which game site had a video in which they gushed about how Super Mario Galaxy had no flaws they could speak of and was in fact the perfect game. I've never actually played said game, but I still call that a bogus claim, as nobody can develop a perfect game, not even the "mighty" Nintendo.

Good point. And Super Mario Galaxy was definitely not a perfect game.

The whole debate lies on interpretation. Like you said, you can interpret a score to mean how well a game does despite it's flaws. So a perfect score would indicate that despite some flaws, they don't hinder the games otherwise faultlessness.

I personally would say that if you're going to include scores, then make them accurate. Make them so that if there is a flaw, you detract from the score.

I stand by my opening point though, that such a score can't exist in my opinion - just because the number is there doesn't mean it has to be used.

 

[Voodoomancer]

Rating systems overall I think are useless, different people like different types of games.

I think having a 5 star system with an independent rating for Gameplay, Story, Looks, etc. would work better.

 

[SimuLord]

Numerical ratings are for illiterate mouth-breathing fools who can't be bothered to actually read the context of the review and figure out for themselves a game's strengths and weaknesses. They also exist for the benefit of some asshole in marketing who can then turn around and get the game company to buy more advertising in their magazine.

People who can actually read and think critically don't need review scores.

 

[Anton P. Nym]

Oh forgot to weigh in on the 100% 10/10 issue... no game is actually perfect, but I think given the coarseness of a review points system there very well could be games that, in the reviewer's opinion, pegs the meter. Again, it's the artificial precision of using a numerical score... saying that no game deserves a 10 is like saying no movie or restaurant is worth a 5-star rating because 5/5 is perfect and no movie or restaurant is perfect.

-- Steve

 

[Klepa]

I think it's ok to give a game a 10/10. It sort of goes without saying that there is no perfect game. No need to get all 'witty' about it.

 

[CelticRaven163]

If one game gets 8.5 and another gets 9.5 i'm gonna buy the one that appeals to me the most. Review scores aren't a science, if a game gets a four and i was hyped about it i'll probably give it a miss, but if it gets a respectable score (i.e. 8+) i'm gonna buy it, so a 4% difference to a score is kinda redundent.

 

[baseracer]

The only game I believe that is perfect is GTA:SA. Everything in the game was done right.

 

[FiveSpeedf150]

If they give a high score they are accused of being fanboys/on the take. If they give a low score they are accused of being fanboys/haters. The clear solution is not to have scores attached to reviews.

This pretty much sums it up for me.

And also, gaming mags, when you review a game, do not admit to being fanboys. Just a hint. You've just basically saying your going to give it a high review, no matter what.

Oh, and 10/10 do actually exist. In OXM, they gave it to Bioshock, PGR4 and GTA IV.

OXM is a very biased magazine, considering it's just for the Xbox crowd, Bioshock and PGR4 both being MS exclusives(Bioshock atleast when it was reviewed), and GTAIV was a 7.5 at best.

I have found Game Informer very biased in giving most games that will sell really well higher than normal scores.

Exactly. I'm a GTA Fanboy and even I'll admit that GTA IV was an embarrassment when held up next to San Andreas. Could have been so much more....

 

[FiveSpeedf150]

I agree that nothing deserves a perfect score except Ocarina of Time, but as for different gaming platforms getting different scores on the same games, it's mostly about the controls, and how well the game was ported. Whatever metascore the game has for the console it was originally for should be considered it's score.

It was damn close.

 

[CelticRaven163]

To deal with the side note, MGS4 is one of my all time favorite games, alotta reviews gave it a ten, was it perfect? No, but at the same time no one looks at a 10/10 score on a game and thinks "Wow! This is gonna be the best game of all time" they just think "I'll give this a play then".

 

[chronobreak]

Numerical ratings are for illiterate mouth-breathing fools who can't be bothered to actually read the context of the review and figure out for themselves a game's strengths and weaknesses. They also exist for the benefit of some asshole in marketing who can then turn around and get the game company to buy more advertising in their magazine.

People who can actually read and think critically don't need review scores.

Wow... really? Why are you so bitter? Did a scoring system tear your family apart? Look, some of us don't want to read an entire article about every detail of the game, and just want a quick and easy way to establish if we're going to rent or skip a game. If someone tells me GTA 4 got a 9.6 while some other game got a 2.3, well, I can assume without devoting any more time to the review that GTA 4 is the superior game. Quick, easy, painless, and I can get on to enjoying the rest of life that much quicker.

You are really taking it to an unnecessary extreme by blatantly insulting people who may prefer this system.

 

[Treblaine]

Pro tip:

If you have a PS3 and are wondering about Uncharted 2, ignore the reviews and just try the open beta.

Don't have PS3? Well then never mind about the lack of access to the beta, you don't even have the console.

Now everyone here should know me for the PS3-sceptic I am but I have seen the in depth tech analyses and played the beta and I'm telling you... it is GOOD!

It is a game that redeems the entire console to me and unlike Killzone 2 (which was a bit naff) Uncharted 2 truly is Sony's killer app, this is the system seller right here. It may be derivative but as GT put it; no one can deny they didn't put it together into one fine package.

 

[minoes]

Yes, no game is perfect, but sometimes an 8/10 is not enough. This is an excerpt from The RAM Rider:

[quote/]
[B/]The game predictably receives 10/10[/B] which, by the Officially Corrupt Xbox 360 Magazine?s standards, makes it just as good as Perfect Dark Zero. For us, the stand-out quote from the review is this:

[I/]?Rockstar was still making the final tweaks as I played, so I can?t say whether my minor grumbles ? the cover system stumbling in box-filled environments, slightly over-enthusiastic target lock-on, the occasional pop-up ? will be present in the box you buy in two weeks? time.?
[/I]
Now hang on ? surely you?re not saying you reviewed unfinished code? Surely you?re not admitting that this 9-page Rockstar love-in is actually a preview, what with it not being based on finished code?

[B/][EDIT] Jon Hicks very politely declined to comment specifically when we asked him if he would have given the game a 10 if the unfinished code was sold in that state, and he also passed up the opportunity to settle the big question on everybody's lips: is GTA 4 better than Perfect Dark Zero? He did point out that he stands by his review, though. Thanks, Jon Hicks![/B]

[/quote]

http://ramraider.blogspot.com/2008/04/officially-corrupt-world-exclusive-gta.html

Sometimes a 10/10 (or a 21/20) is not a matter of opinion, it´s just business.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.142956#3204531

 

[Nimbus]

On a side note, does anyone else agree that 100% and 10/10 scores don't exist? No game is perfect, so don't score it so.

Well, a game can only be rated in comparison to other games. This means there should be one game, the 'best' game, at 100%. Unfortunatly it's not that simple, but that should be the theory.

 

[sneak_copter]

I would prefer a simple system that says "Buy, Rent, or Avoid". We really don't need anything more than that. However, some people like to see a numerical value, because they seem more understandable. I don't mind scores, but I don't like to flaunt scores as some kind of evidence that your game sucks.

Yeah, I prefer the numbering system of 1-10.
Although I think arguing over scores is pointless and stupid, and putting too much trust in reviews is the same thing. It's an opinion, after all.

 

[Dr.Sean]

100% rating of a gaming is the equivalence of admitting fanboy/girlhood

 

[RanD00M]

Oh, and 10/10 do actually exist. In OXM, they gave it to Bioshock, PGR4 and GTA IV.

They also give every other game to come out a 10/10.