Review scores - what do we think about them?

[MiracleOfSound]

I was looking at the Prototype review thread and it got me to thinking about reviews and scores and how we base our view of games upon them.

Now I will admit that unlike music or cinema, I do listen to critics scores and opinions on games sometimes because while other art forms can be looked at more objectively, if the fundamental gameplay mechanics or controls in a game don't work properly then the player will have a bad, unenjoyable experience with it and the critic can often make them aware of this.

It is also much easier to pick apart technical and graphical flaws in a medium that is so reliant on new technology that is continuously evolving and changing.

So my questions for the escapists are:

Do you pay attention to review scores?

What constitutes a score that for you means an above average/great game? 7? 9?

Do you find you often disagree with scores given to games?

 

[WrongSprite]

I don't mind them, they give you a tl;dr option.

7 Is the minimum for me, but I don't buy things purely on reviews.

I disagree every 5 seconds, it's all about opinions after all.

 

[VitalSigns]

Scores are stupid and I hate them, but I understand why they are used, and why they won't go away.

 

[NoNameMcgee]

I hate to quote Yahtzee (but he's so damn quoteable!)

"I don't believe in scores because I don't believe a complex opinion can be represented numerically."

I pretty much agree with this. I like reviews though, there are not just opinions in them, there are facts behind the opinions, and you can decide for yourself whether those facts will impact on your enjoyment of the game.

However, in the long run, scores can make things simple and easy just to see whether or not the majority of people think the game is worth buying (such as Metacritic). Which makes things easier than reading a bunch of reviews and I can be sure that it's at least unlikely I will disagree with the popular opinion (i'm not one of those outcasts who hate popular things. Things are popular for a reason, y'know?)

Before getting a game, I will always first read at least one review from a respectable site, and check Metacritic to see if the score is above 7/10. Usually i'll end up reading 2 or 3 reviews though.

But personally in my own reviews I don't like to use any kind of scoring.

 

[Kif]

I think the first thing is to find someone you trust, personally I've gone with 2 mature, unbias magazines Edge and Games TM...

Because I'm trying to save for a house I will only really consider games with a high score at the moment 8,9,10... but if I read the review of an above average game 6,7 sort of areas and it sounds like it is good but not amazing and it is something I would enjoy I'll consider it. So I think the review text is infinitely more useful than the ending score, but at a glance the score is useful to determine if it's worth caring about the game at all.

 

[Cpt_Oblivious]

I don't mind them, they give you a tl;dr option.

I prefer PCGamer UK's Thumbnail Review which is basically 3 "It is..." and 1 "It's not...".

It's useful.

 

[Anachronism]

I don't dislike scores as such, as they're a good way to get a general idea of what a game is like.

But that's all they're good for: a general idea. If you look at the game's score you have to read the review as well, so that you know what the individual aspects of it are like. It's all well and good seeing Shadow of the Colossus get a 9.7 on IGN, but if you bought it based on that, only to discover that you don't like puzzle games, you'd have a problem. You obviously need to research the game a bit more thoroughly than just looking at a score.

I do think reviews without scores are better, because there's no way the reader could overlook flaws in the game by seeing that it got a high score. They're much better for finding out exactly what the reviewer thought of the game, rather than just their general opinion.

 

[Jandau]

Numerical scores are not a problem, it's how we interpret them. The issues start when people argue over which game should have gotten that 0.1 extra and compare games based on a few decimals (LOL, my game got 8.7 and yours got 8.5, so your game must suck!).

When it comes to individual reviews numerical estimates might be a bit unreliable, but it works far better with review score agregate sites such as Metacritic, where trends can be noted and the larger sample becomes more relevant. Average user scores are also a good indicator.

 

[Bellvedere]

Numerical scores are kinda hard for me to judge. It's hard to tell what people really mean with numbers, like obviously the higher the better but what does 7 mean? I find it's easiest to just read a review. That way even if you read something on say gamespot where the reviewer is trying to talk up a bad game to justify an average score you can still tell by the tone of the review what they really think.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

I think the first thing is to find someone you trust, personally I've gone with 2 mature, unbias magazines Edge and Games TM...

Because I'm trying to save for a house I will only really consider games with a high score at the moment 8,9,10... but if I read the review of an above average game 6,7 sort of areas and it sounds like it is good but not amazing and it is something I would enjoy I'll consider it. So I think the review text is infinitely more useful than the ending score, but at a glance the score is useful to determine if it's worth caring about the game at all.

Those 2 magazines are really great, they are also the two I trust the most as they don't overhype average games like some of the console specific mags. I also find IGN to be quite reiable. Gamespot... not so much.

 

[Lyndraco]

I have found the games that I generally enjoy don't really score well (some do, just not most), so I generally ignore reviews. However, as some have stated previously, if they comment on lousy game mechanics, poor load times, or the probability of said game crashing your system, I will probably pay attention to that.

I believe that reviews give you opinions, which you can take or leave. I just don't like other people telling me what I will like or not like. If I'm iffy about it, I'll rent it or borrow it from someone not read a review.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Numerical scores are not a problem, it's how we interpret them. The issues start when people argue over which game should have gotten that 0.1 extra and compare games based on a few decimals (LOL, my game got 8.7 and yours got 8.5, so your game must suck!).

When it comes to individual reviews numerical estimates might be a bit unreliable, but it works far better with review score agregate sites such as Metacritic, where trends can be noted and the larger sample becomes more relevant. Average user scores are also a good indicator.

Average user scores have one major problem though in fanboyism. It's not unheard of for games like Gears 2 to have terrible ratings before they are even released.

 

[EscapeGoat_v1legacy]

I don't mind scores, although generally I prefer a recommendation in words, which could be a result of my stay on the Escapist, since the User Reviews sticky mentions recommendations as the preferred form of review scoring, I think.

 

[Phoenix Arrow]

I don't read reviews. If you don't play bad games, what else can you complain about? Forming your own opinions ftw.

 

[Z of the Na'vi]

I don't let reviews keep me from buying a good game (I'm looking at you IGN). I ignore reviews most of the time, and I allow myself to form my own opinion of a game. Why should people rely on reviewers to tell them if a game is good or not? They are all personal opinion. Go out, buy the game yourself, and THEN create your OWN opinion on how good the said game is.

 

[Sixties Spidey]

Scores are worth shit all anyway.

It's worth something to people whose attention spans are so fucking bad, they resemble that of 99 percent of the world's consumer base.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

I have a few different review sites I visit. Sometimes I go by the score, more often I just read the review and decide whether the game sounds like something I'd enjoy. I tend to use Gamespy, Game Chronicles and maybe Acegamez. They tend to have quality written reviews.

As far as scoring goes, anything 7 or up gets me doing some research.

 

[Jandau]

Numerical scores are not a problem, it's how we interpret them. The issues start when people argue over which game should have gotten that 0.1 extra and compare games based on a few decimals (LOL, my game got 8.7 and yours got 8.5, so your game must suck!).

When it comes to individual reviews numerical estimates might be a bit unreliable, but it works far better with review score agregate sites such as Metacritic, where trends can be noted and the larger sample becomes more relevant. Average user scores are also a good indicator.

Average user scores have one major problem though in fanboyism. It's not unheard of for games like Gears 2 to have terrible ratings before they are even released.

I admit, user scores are more accurate the less publicity a game gets. High profile games, especially if they belong to a popular franchise will have badly unbalanced results even in user scores.

However, it's up to the user to interpret the various data placed in front of him. Various types of numerical scores (review sites, score agregates, average user scores) can be very helpful if one knows what to look for.

 

[Scobie]

DELETED

 

[HentMas]

i dont care about them scores, but if there is something i do listen is the story and gameplay mechanics, if the story is great (better said, in my liking), i preaty much dont mind about anything else, but if the story is so so, well then i look into the game mechanics, i enjoy a good game if i have fun doing what i am supposed to do, for example i love RTS games, and i liked the story in Halo, but after playing the demo of Halo Wars, well, i hated the controls and the story didn´t appeal to me that much, so i know i will never buy that game, in difference, i play a lot of castelvania games mainly because of the story, but i hate the game mechanics