Why do most games never get below a 7? EDIT: And how to we fix it?

[Elamdri]

This is something that has always bothered me about game reviews. For some reason, games never seem to get below a 7 unless they are REALLY bad and never seem to get below a 5 unless they are pretty much unplayable.

This just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I mean, if you think about it, The average score among games should be a 5 on a 1-10 scale. But that's not what we see.

Personally, I think game reviews should be taken in a different direction if reviewers can't handle a concept like a 1-10 scale. I just don't know what that direction should be. A 1-5 scale I don't see a particularly working for a number of reasons. 1st, you run the same risk that you run with a 1-10 where a game would never get below a 4 unless it was abysmally bad. 2nd, a 1-10 scale is actually in theory better than a 1-5 scale because it gives you room to be more precise.

Pass/Fail wouldn't really work either, since quite frankly you would either have a problem where all average games would either fail or pass, giving you no way to distinguish average from crap or gold, respectively.

If I had my way, I suppose all reviews would work off a Zero Punctuation style that completely abandons numbers. However, I realize that practicality demands that sometimes we just be able to look at a number and make a decision.

Anyone have any thoughts on this? How do we solve this problem?

 

[scnj]

7 has become the new average precisely because so many games get such high scores. In a time when there's an 8-10 game every month, a score of 7 doesn't cut it any more.

 

[Rayne870]

Believe it or not most bad games don't make it past early development. A lot are scrapped or put in the closet for later refinement. Most developers won't risk their company reputation putting out something they aren't comfortable with and have confidence in. After games pass through that filter they end up going to reviews and such so usually games are at least average in quality.

As far as reviews go I would be happier if more reviewers broke up their score or had annotated scores such as Reviews on the Run. They rate from 1-10 but have a pros/cons list to go with it so you can get an idea of where the game really shines or what it is about.

 

[Tupolev]

Two possibly influences.

First, people don't seem to realize that the 1-10 rating scale should be comparable to the letter grade scale in schools, rather than to the raw grade scale in schools, and so they map game scores over acceptable raw grade scores rather than the letter grade equivalents, thus ignoring half the scale.

Second, video game scores started going through massive inflation some years ago.

 

[Elamdri]

7 has become the new average precisely because so many games get such high scores. In a time when there's an 8-10 game every month, a score of 7 doesn't cut it any more.

I wouldn't even say 7 is the new average. I would say 7 is slightly less than average.

The problem is that on a scale of 1-10 to make 7 the average, less than average, whatever you want to call it, is deceptive.

 

[Blind Sight]

Depends on the site, but there's been people who were fired for rating a big budget game with a score lower then a 7 (I recall this happening to a reviewer over the first Kane and Lynch). There's also the problem of ad revenue for websites and magazines, I'm sure you'd alienate companies by giving them lousy grades. And then there's the whole 'subjective' element, a game you might think is absolute shit someone else will love, or at least give it a passing grade.

I disagree with the 'Zero Punctation' style method as well, largely because I find that Yahtzee gets too hung up on little things and then obviously exploits that for the sake of comedy. Not the best way to actually understand the game or what it entails.

 

[Elamdri]

After games pass through that filter they end up going to reviews and such so usually games are at least average in quality.

But if most games are of AVERAGE quality, they should get a 5, which is the AVERAGE score between 1-10.

 

[Elamdri]

Second, video game scores started going through massive inflation some years ago.

What do you mean by that?

 

[number2301]

It's pretty much human nature, you get exactly the same in any kind of survey when doing research. The vast majority of people will start with the highest score, or sometimes the second highest, and then reduce.

 

[Tupolev]

I disagree with the 'Zero Punctation' style method as well, largely because I find that Yahtzee gets too hung up on little things and then obviously exploits that for the sake of comedy. Not the best way to actually understand the game or what it entails.

Elamdri was saying that we should judge games on more qualitative bases rather than simply slapping a number on, not that we should tear all games completely apart by exploiting comedic potential.

 

[Rayne870]

After games pass through that filter they end up going to reviews and such so usually games are at least average in quality.

But if most games are of AVERAGE quality, they should get a 5, which is the AVERAGE score between 1-10.

I said "at least average" and that's quality without reflection from reviewers. Meaning you'll at least enjoy it for the time you play it but when the next top title comes out you'll forget bout it. Think about them as time filler games. Other than that rating something at a 5/10 these days is pretty much a death sentence.

Edit: All of that said I really don't pay attention to numbers and strictly analyze the gameplay footage for myself and pay attention to the justification behind the number as well as additional commentary.

 

[Elamdri]

Depends on the site, but there's been people who were fired for rating a big budget game with a score lower then a 7 (I recall this happening to a reviewer over the first Kane and Lynch). There's also the problem of ad revenue for websites and magazines, I'm sure you'd alienate companies by giving them lousy grades. And then there's the whole 'subjective' element, a game you might think is absolute shit someone else will love, or at least give it a passing grade.

You're talking about a different (although equally valid and probably more important) problem. That problem is that publishers are paying reviewers to give their game an "Above Average" score when they don't deserve it. The problem I'm talking about is why we have an artificial average score.

If Kane and Lynch is Truly a below average game, then it should get a 4 or a 3. Not the 6 that got Jeff Gertsmann fired. In fact, if Kayne and Lynch really is a below average game, he was overrating it with a 6.

 

[TehCookie]

I think they take it from the grading scale where 70 = C = average. And just like most parents gamers want their games to get As or Bs because Cs aren't good enough for them. Any game that's 5 or below would simple be unplayable/failing.

 

[Elamdri]

Other than that rating something at a 5/10 these days is pretty much a death sentence.

But it's only a death sentence because we've artificially inflated the scoring. If the scoring was truly on a 1-10 scale, a 5 would not be a BAD score.

 

[Rayne870]

I think they take it from the grading scale where 70 = C = average. Just like parents gamers want their games to get As or Bs because Cs aren't good enough. Anything that's 5 or below would simple be unplayable/failing.

That is very plausible.

 

[Tupolev]

Second, video game scores started going through massive inflation some years ago.

What do you mean by that?

Inflation. Higher numbers for less content.

Currency inflation happens when there's a whole lot of capital zipping on the market compared to the flow of actual products; if a government decides to start spending and distributing huge amounts of money, for instance, the value of each unit of currency goes down, and the way this manifests itself is as an increase in the dollars-value of products. Suddenly, the banannas that were going for 70 cents per pound last year are 73 cents per pound.

Grade inflation in schools happens when parents get in the face of helpless teachers and whine at them for giving their kid anything less than an B; since teachers can't really do anything about it, they take the easy road and start throwing A's about. Suddenly, there's a whole lot of A students.

Score inflation? Eh, possibly a combination of advertising pressures and corporate selling out. Regardless, long ago, there were some reviewers from which scores of '9' actually meant something. Now it's impossible to tell which AAA titles are good and which ones such because so many are rated highly.

 

[Blind Sight]

I disagree with the 'Zero Punctation' style method as well, largely because I find that Yahtzee gets too hung up on little things and then obviously exploits that for the sake of comedy. Not the best way to actually understand the game or what it entails.

Elamdri was saying that we should judge games on more qualitative bases rather than simply slapping a number on, not that we should tear all games completely apart by exploiting comedic potential.

I find Zero Punctation to lack this as well however. I probably should've explained my point a bit more, I do understand what he wants in a game review, I'm just replying that Zero Punctation is hardly a good example of this.

 

[Jiefu]

Two possibly influences.

First, people don't seem to realize that the 1-10 rating scale should be comparable to the letter grade scale in schools, rather than to the raw grade scale in schools, and so they map game scores over acceptable raw grade scores rather than the letter grade equivalents, thus ignoring half the scale.

This is largely it. When video games were just starting out, they were kids' toys, mostly (that's changed, but that change is irrelevant). Video game reviewers, thus, skewed younger than other reviewers, and were thus more influenced by their time in school, where (in the US, at least), only grades above 80 are considered good, and grades below 60 are seen as a failure.

 

[lacktheknack]

Mostly because bad games fall into death and obscurity, or never get released in the first place.

Of course, when they DO get out, they're very noticeable.

 

[Elamdri]

Score inflation? Eh, possibly a combination of advertising pressures and corporate selling out. Regardless, long ago, there were some reviewers from which scores of '9' actually meant something. Now it's impossible to tell which AAA titles are good and which ones such because so many are rated highly.

Ah, I see now what you're trying to say. Yeah, I guess really the question I'm trying to say is how do we stop/fix that?