Rate your Games 2015

[Spuuky]

Wow, so many games that are underneath a 7/10.

Half of all games should be 5/10 or below. Something like 90% of games should be between a 3 and an 8.

Not at all.

Actually that is in fact how statistics work. I find it very unlikely that game quality does not fall into a standard bell curve. Please present any evidence to the contrary that you might have at your disposal.

And "game reviewers use imbecilic scoring standards" is not evidence. Game reviews use about a 5 point scale and call it a 10 point scale. 6/10 should just 1/5. 8/10 should be 3/5. Because that's how they actually score them.

[Psychotic]

Wow, so many games that are underneath a 7/10.

Half of all games should be 5/10 or below. Something like 90% of games should be between a 3 and an 8.

Not at all.

Actually that is in fact how statistics work. I find it very unlikely that game quality does not fall into a standard bell curve. Please present any evidence to the contrary that you might have at your disposal.

Your point is irrelevant. Subjective opinion doesn't fall neatly into categorised boxes.

Suppose ten games are released and each one consists of controlling a single pixel around a blank screen. For the sake of differentiation the pixel is a different colour for each game. You review these games. Do you score them 1 out of 10, 2 out of 10, 3 and so on? While I must concede it would make for a rather fetching standard bell curve I wouldn't attach much weight to the critical opinion of the person who insisted the games be scored as such.

[Spuuky]

...what? Normally your opinions at least make some smattering of sense, but I really have no idea what you're trying to say. A bell curve zoomed that far in would result in those games all having a score of 5/10, which is the best you can do with a statistically insignificant number of entries. Which is correct, there's no differentiation between them. Your system would rate them all 8/10.

[Psychotic]

Oh, sorry. I'll dumb it down. Let me know if you want me to lower it even further or if you're good here.

Ten games are five out of ten?!?!? HAHAHAH! no sir!!! that is not the 90 percent you said!!! spuuky all "hey guise 90 percent will be between 3 - 8" uhhhh 10 games of 10 is HUNDRED PERCENT!!! what is this?! CONTRADICTION LMAOOOOOOOOOO

ps: neva sed what my system was nub hehehehe~

[Formalhaut]

Never the mind that finding a game below a 4 is rare. Having said that, there's a question whether reviewers would even bother reviewing games that are clearly terrible.

As for the '5 to 10' or the '1 to 10' scale, I use the former, but I do accept that that the '1 to 10' scale makes much more sense, for the reasons Sharky says. I just struggle equating 5 as a perfectly average game. Calling a game 'average' in my eyes is sort of an insult in itself.

I prefer scales or reviews which break the score down into different components: sound, story, graphics, etc. and then formulating an overall score from several sub-scores. That makes more sense and is more transparent.

[Spuuky]

Psychotic: Nope, that level pretty accurately reflects your viewpoint.

Formaulhaut: Yes, of course a singular score to represent the quality of a game is fundamentally subpar, but if you're going to do it anyway then you might as well use a scale that makes sense.

Why would you "struggle" equating 5 to a perfectly average game? 5 is the actual average of 0 and 10 (on a 1-10 scale technically 5.5 would be "average" but whatever, that's a minor detail).

[Pumpkin]

I prefer scales or reviews which break the score down into different components: sound, story, graphics, etc. and then formulating an overall score from several sub-scores. That makes more sense and is more transparent.

I try to do that in my journal and instead of using a rating number, I just rate how much I liked it. I'm not really trying to do professional reviews though, I'm just writing reviews of games I've played because it's fun and to help others hopefully find games they might enjoy as well. But for the purposes of this thread I just did a 1-10 scale really. But yeah now you know why I picked the numbers I did. When I give a game a 6, I still like the game. It doesn't mean I think it's rubbish ^.^

I feel bad for starting this whole scaling thing now

[Psychotic]

Before I have to step out to visit the local burns unit, I would like to clarify that I would score all of the sole pixel games 0/10. The function of a game as a product is to bring entertainment to the consumer. There are of course a number of different ways they can achieve this - compelling gameplay, a gripping narrative, luscious graphics and so on. A game that provides its consumer with no entertainment should be scored a zero as it is not fit for purpose. Something that is not fit for purpose should not be scored as 5/10 just because the other products on the market are equally awful. The developers will see that as acceptable and continue to produce products of this quality.

In a more relevant scenario to this thread, if someone is to play 10 games this year and they all provided a large amount of entertainment then they have all met their purpose as a product and logically should receive high scores. Scoring a game poorly to fit strict statistical criteria when it has provided exactly what you wanted from it is nonsensical. It's fine to give every game you play a high score if they provided you with that much enjoyment. Indeed, well done - you are a savvy consumer who presumably makes purchases either relevant to your interests or based on critical reception. I assume that's most of us here.

For the record, I agree with Pumpkin that 5/10 is not a bad score and that "only 7/10 upwards is worth playing" is silly.

[Spuuky]

For any individual it is plausible that the particular set of games they personally have played could all be well above average.

I assumed the pixel games were the only games that existed in the world which I was scoring them for; I was comparing them only to each other, as the only games that exist. Compared to actual games that are produced, they'd be 0/10 or 1/10 depending on where your scale starts.

[Sephex]

And this is why I said I didn't like this type of scoring system earlier. People have vast definitions on what numbers mean. I personally view 5/10 as someone saying, "Yeah. Hmm. Yeah, it was alright." Since all of the games I personally played made me feel better or much better than that, I am not going to give it that kind of rating with that attitude of mine.

A lot of people say, "Well, what's the point of the lower scores then?" Well, I'll do a fly by on how I personally view the numbers.

0/10: Disaster. The game is literally unplayable and/or is completely devoid of all fun.
1/10: Terrible. Horribly crafted game all around. Probably is barely playable too.
2/10: Very Bad. There might be a subtle glimmer of a game, but it still plain sucks.
3/10: Bad. The game works on a fundamental level, but all or almost all aspects are just wrong or poorly crafted.
4/10: Dull. You can see a couple of things that are alright, but that's about it. Overall, not a good experience still.
5/10: Meh. It's not the worst, but it is not the best. Maybe a handful of people would enjoy it, but the majority will pass on it.
6/10: Alright. This might find a cult following, but there are still a lot of problems with the game.
7/10: Pretty good. Overall a fun experience despite (usually personal) grievances with the game. Fairly solid overall.
8/10: Good. Well crafted. Most flaws can be overlooked and most will have tons of fun.
9/10: Great. Nearly everything works. Any flaws aren't a big deal. Game is a pleasure to play through.
10/10: Awesome. Does not mean flawless. This is a game that completely satisfied the player. Any flaws really boils down to niche personal preferences or edgy people hating on something that is most likely popular.

Having even broken it down like that I still don't believe those definitions are rock solid. When I wrote for a website with a couple of buddies a few years ago I absolutely hated the number system. We had people who were over enthusiastic and gave anything they simply enjoyed a 10/10. We had people that would give a 3/10 for a movie because there might have been one scene that sort of didn't work. There were the people who took numbers way too literally and gave everything a 5 or 6 because they wanted to look cool by appearing cynical (and thus intelligent). It was a mess. When I wrote for a college newspaper the editors thankfully let me get away without using ANY scoring system at all. I wrote what I had to write and gave an overall blurb at the end. No one ever had a problem understanding how I felt about a game, and any frequent reader of mine could easily tell how they would feel about a game based on how I described it.

So that's my fun time happy thing. Feel free to pick it apart and feel better about yourself.

[Spuuky]

7/10 post

[Sephex]

7/10 post

God damned it, I laughed.

[Ayen]

I reject your rating system and substitute my own.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Skip it
F.E.A.R. Online: Skip it
Final Fantasy VI: Get it
Street Fighter II' Champion Edition: Get it
Mortal Kombat: Get it
Soul Blade: Get it
Tekken: Try it
Beyond Two Souls: Get it
The Walking Dead Season Two: Get it
Resident Evil 3 Nemesis: Get it
Silent Hill 3: Get it
WWF WrestleMania 2000: Get it
The Legend of Zelda: Get it
Final Fantasy: Get it
Metal Gear: Get it
Rush 2 Extreme Racing USA: Get it
Xenogears: Get it
The Wolf Among Us: Get it
Left 4 Dead: Get it
Phoenix Wright Ace Attorney Justice For All: Get it
Final Fantasy V: Try it
Yggdra Union: Try it
NES Batman: Skip it
GEN Batman: Get it
The Magical Quest starring Mickey Mouse: Get it
The Lucky Dime Caper starring Donald Duck: Get it
The Lion King: Skip it
GEN Aladdin: Get it
SNES Aladdin: Try it
The Little Mermaid: Get it
BattleTanx Global Assault: Get it
Super Mario Sunshine: Get it
Battletoads & Double Dragon: Get it
Crash Bandicoot 2 Cortex Strikes Back: Get it
Sword of Sodan: Skip it
Shadow of the Beast 2: Skip it
Dark Castle: Skip it
Street Fighter Movie Game: Try it
Superman 64: Skip it
Castlevania 64: Try it
Super Mario Bros 3: Get it
Sonic the Hedgehog 3: Get it
Super Metroid: Get it
Chrono Trigger: Get it
Portal: Get it
RPG Maker 3: Try it
Eye Toy Play: Get it

GEN stands for Genesis/Mega Drive for those of you who don't know.

I had a pretty good year.

[sharkythesharkdogg]

Never the mind that finding a game below a 4 is rare. Having said that, there's a question whether reviewers would even bother reviewing games that are clearly terrible.

As for the '5 to 10' or the '1 to 10' scale, I use the former, but I do accept that that the '1 to 10' scale makes much more sense, for the reasons Sharky says. I just struggle equating 5 as a perfectly average game. Calling a game 'average' in my eyes is sort of an insult in itself.

I prefer scales or reviews which break the score down into different components: sound, story, graphics, etc. and then formulating an overall score from several sub-scores. That makes more sense and is more transparent.

I think it clearly comes down to perception. The idea of a '5 to 10' scale is at best misleading. It's effectively the same as a '1-5' scale with one extra place. In fact, that's how I interpret most game reviews by major publishers now. The only difference is rating a game "7 of 10" instead of "2.5 of 5" sounds better when you break it down to "the game scored a 7" instead of "the game scored 2.5".

Look at Sephex's thoughts behind each score on the 1-10 scale. There's a good solid range there. Even if I don't necessarily agree with the thoughts behind each number, it's pretty close. Furthermore, if I were to read his reviews regularly I'd begin to know what to expect from a game based off of his scores.

Now take his thoughts and try to squeeze them into the 5-10 scale. It's suddenly much less detailed. Two games that may score a "7 out of 10" on the new, smaller scale could score differently on the old 1-10 scale. One could get a "5 out of 10" and the other could get a "7 out of 10". There's more room for nuance.

Particularly when you factor in all the separate categories you mentioned (story, music, graphics), limiting yourself to a 5 or 6 point scale begins to get tough.

TL;DR I don't think a 5 or 6 grading point scale is particularly bad, but I find it intentionally misleading that the scale is shown between 5 and 10 versus keeping it 1 to 5. I think having a 1-10 scale where you really only use the last 3 numbers is either asinine or even more intentionally misleading in an attempt to appease publishers and keep a steady cash flow to the magazine/website that reviewer works for.

I think a 10 point scale is better as it gives the opportunity to have more range of quality between games represented.

[Karifean]

9.5 G-senjou no Maou
9.0 Muv-Luv Alternative
9.0 Symphonic Rain
8.5 Rose Guns Days
8.0 AIR
8.0 Cross†Channel
8.0 Grisaia no Kajitsu
8.0 Kara no Shoujo
8.0 999
8.0 Virtue's Last Reward
8.0 Maji de Watashi ni Koi Shinasai!
8.0 Sharin no Kuni, Himawari no Shoujo
7.5 Hakuouki ~Shinsengumi Kitan~
7.0 Analogue: A Hate Story
7.0 Hate Plus
7.0 eden*
7.0 Katawa Shoujo
7.0 Saya no Uta
6.5 Moonshine
6.5 Muv-Luv
6.0 don't take it personally babe, it just ain't your story
6.0 Digital: A Love Story

I generally use a 0-10 scale reminiscent of the usual school system with anything above 5 being passing mark. 5 means I'm completely neutral towards it, or in other words everything positive about it had an equal negative to set it off. Since I appreciate pretty much everything I read, play and watch anything below a 6 is a rarity. Also I don't really calculate the score by any real pattern, they're more like "tiers" for me. And I guess I do have an 11/10 so I do the whole scaling thing rather loosely.

Oh and since this is in the gaming forum I might as well add Undertale which would get a solid 8.5 so far and might go up to a 9 if the genocide route turns out as amazing as it started. Oh and Dark Chronicle which I'd give a 7 so far. And Perfect Cherry Blossom which gets an 8. Wow I really stopped playing regular games somewhere down the road, didn't I...