10/10 is............
A) Perfect game
B) Pros outweigh the Cons
A is virtually impossible and makes 10/10 an unusable joke rating
10/10 is............
A) Perfect game
B) Pros outweigh the Cons
A is virtually impossible and makes 10/10 an unusable joke rating
Both are bad. Option A is too high of a standard, Option B is too low of a standard
10/10 is a game that has little to no room for improvement. See Tetris. Specifically the Gabe Boy version.
B is reasonable though.
You have a flawed game that isnt quite the best in pacing and design, but the Talent put into Animation, Music, Decisionmaking and Strategy is meaningful and the game is engaging despite having shortcomings.
The pros being so good and making the experience resonate with the player tenfold.
It'd probably be more meaningful than a solid perfect functioning hypothetical 10/10 game that doesnt do anything new or interesting or particularly well. And if it does then theres no compromise, making it unrealistic.
>Perfect game
Make that effectively perfect. If there are flaws, they are miniscule or unimportant.
Perhaps true perfection is to provide great enjoyment despite your flaws. This is how nirvana is achieved.
Thats literally the 2nd choice though.
"The Pros outweight the cons, thus 10/10"
compared to
"No Cons, 10/10"
>true perfection
That goes against the idea of perfection though. Thats accepting imperfection and finding value regardless.
Perfection is to be without flaw and irreverence.
Intelligent people will say that a 10/10 game doesn't exist
>irreverence
If your definition of 10/10 is PERFECTION then yes, it doesnt exist because perfection as a concept is unachievable.
10/10 is in the top 1% of video games. Should be 9.9/10 but that doesn't sound as nice. Then 9/10 is in the top 90% of all video games, 8/10 top 80% and so on
Numerical scorings exists so that
a) retards can be told what to buy
or
b) retards can express their opinions without having to think of hard words
Is it such a low-resolution way of looking at art that it's essentially useless. It's no better than just saying "I liked it" or "I didn't like it." No room for nuance, no room for balancing of strengths and weaknesses, forces all games to be hierarchized and compared even when such a thing isn't beneficial
>1/5 = bad
>2/5 = below average
>3/5 = average
>4/5 = above average
>5/5 = great
I've played plenty "perfect games" I consider to be average.
I've always like Pissed Off Pablo's rating scale. A 10/10 doesn't mean the game is perfect, it just means the game is 100% worth your time, and worth every cent.
>inb4 lel he gave skyrim a 10/10
His taste is bad, but his scale is nice
>Is it such a low-resolution way of looking at art
You're not wrong
Perfection doesn't exist so of course 10/10 never actually means it's perfect, dumb user.
C)Physical death.
which castlevenia is this?
>The voice acting in SotN and RE was poorly-acted, campy schlock, yet it genuinely made the games more endearing and enjoyable.
>The game loop in Darkest Dungeon was an unenjoyable, excruciating slog, even though that was the developers' exact intention.
How do you go about "rating" these two examples? How do you "rate" shit like Killer7 and Deadly Premonition?
But what if...we added bombs?
A 10/10 game is a feeling
Hard-dropping is an unquestionable improvement over the GB version
Does it feel better than sex?
Like what?
>A is virtually impossible
Wrong
yes, but sex is overrated.
Exactly, a true 10/10 does not and can not exist
the pros of me fucking your ass are that at least you finally get to have sex which outweigh the cons of you having an anal fissure so i guess anal rape is a perfect game
Eh, that's a decent 8 out of 10, but by far not the perfect game.
Fight me
10/10 is a game so singularly excellent, it warrants recommendation to anyone who enjoys video games and sets standards for how certain genres should be executed.
definitely B, no game is perfect, but a game with overwhelming pros,but insignificant and few cons that dont influence your enjoyment, now that is a 10
Not so. The pros could outweigh the cons even if the game had, massive glaring flaws. Such a game would not be a 10/10.
The flaws themselves have to be minor.
A 10/10 is the Jesus Christ of gaming, does such a thing exist?
Perfect implies objectivity and there's no such thing. There's also no such thing as perfection even if viewed subjectively. Scores are merely relative, with a 10/10 meaning "I think this game was better than the vast majority of other games". If there were some universal objectivity then older games would have been rated a lot lower to allow for newer games to be more highly received, such as sequels that are better than what was a 10/10 game at the time
It's a convenience feature. QoL improvement. Doesn't make the actual GAME better.
it lacks battle royale mode
thankfully they fixed that in the new nintendo switch game
10/10 game is fuck you I liked it
It literally does makes moment-to-moment gameplay better
Once you've decided where your piece will go and lined it up, you have no more choices to make or actions to take. Without a hard drop, this leaves you nothing to do but just wait until the thing that you knew was going to happen happens. The addition of a hard drop means that the game can be played as fast as the player can manage and greatly raises the skill ceiling while simultaneously removing a constant inconvenience that affects even beginner players
10/10 doesn't mean perfect, but it does mean it carries your highest possible recommendation. If you can point to a game that is better than it in its own category, it is not a 10/10.
10/10 is subject to the individual
A "perfect" game is obviously not possible. We don't need to get into the philosophy of perfection being unobtainable or anything either.
So a games quality should be based on the amount of pros it has versus it's cons and the effect each could have. A game could be fucking amazing with the best leveling system, AI, levels, etc...but crash every 5 mins and be an awful game because of it. As such, cons can, easily, overwhelm the positive qualities a game has.
The problem with a rating system like this is that flaws someone might be able to overlook can vary from person to person.
A "10" should, in theory, have basically minimal amount of flaws/cons to consider. It's cons should be able to be ignored or otherwise greatly overshadowed by it's other aspects.
We all know games people love despite them having many poor elements to it.
So as you go lower in the scoring system the flaws become more obvious.
More specific version of B.
10/10 games are worth playing for one hundred percent of people capable of playing them, like Portal or Tony Hawk or Guitar Hero. They don't have to be flawless. They just have to be a great use of time, without exceptions needed for individual taste or quirk tolerance.
Guitar Hero was fucking gay
>it does mean it carries your highest possible recommendation
this is the solution to the conundrum: the problem isn't what the game is, the problem is what the rating is. the rating is a measurement of how much you would recommend a game. and you can 10/10 recommend it, even if the game is not the theorized-to-exist perfect 10.
You should only ever assign a 10/10 in the last moments before your death. This makes sure you won't ever find yourself in an awkward situation where you don't have a higher rating to assign in case you find an even better game.
c) a game that at its time and enviroment of release exceeds expectations and excels in various departments to a degree that lifts it above the competition.
Thats how I explain certain 10/10s(mostly before the late 2000's when 10/10 became a meme rating)
gametrailers did that with bloodborne.
only 10 they ever gave out and it was right literally when they killed their site.
A).
Yes, it makes 10/10 unusable. But it makes all ratings lower than 10/10 usable and meaningful.
10/10 is the limit that can never be reached - but we can see how close a game can get to it.
Did any one of you have a problem when you got 100% on a paper in school? You know that wasn't the best paper ever written, right?
Those scores are objectively quantifiable, a game's quality isn't