Anyone else think rating systems in videogames are outdated? Like, nobody actually uses the numbers from 1 to 6 like they mean anything, and 7/8 and 9/10 are near interchangeable.
It should just be a 3 score system: Do not play, good, and exceptional.
steam got it right with recomend, do not recomend and informative
Their only outdated because reviewers hand out 8-10s and awards like candy.
i just checked and im not sure where i got them having an option to do informative as your score from
dont mind me
>male_sex_appeal.jpg
Score doesn't matter without a context, be it numbers from 1 to 10 or from 1 to 3.
Anything below a 6 is reserved for total disaster games like Sonic 06 or shitty PS1 Simpsons games or whatever.
We just don't get as much truly rancid shit like we used to. At worst most modern games are just gonna be mediocre and review scores are reflecting that.
1-10 in general is a shit scale, because people use it in sense of school grades, leaving most of the scale completely unused. Even 1-5 works better, because for some reason people tend to use it better than they would use 1-10, even though both of them have about equal amount of ”actually usable” points in them.
Still, actual god-tier is just forgetting numerical scores, and focusing on writing actually good reviews that tell you more than a score itself could ever do.
This is also true. Actual trainwrecks are surprisingly rare today, bigger problem are games that are seemingly polished, yet still uninspired and forgettable. Thing is, once you’ve been in this hobby long enough, it’s hard to get excited about ”OK” games that don’t exactly do anything that wrong but also lack anything that would make them unique and rememberable.
1 = garbage
2 = genre/series fans
3 = Great
4 = GOTY potential
The gap between 2 and 3 needs to be big to force the reviewer to take a side
I prefer a normalized scale where 5 is average and the vast majority of games fall in the 4-6 range. That's how I rate food, it can apply to games.
Do you really need more though?
>7/8 this game is not great, only buy if you're a fan
>9/10 this game is great, buy it
Simple really. They could all just have a yes/no like that and it would be the same thing.
this games are kinda special in that they can be shit like anything else but you can go even further than that and be near or literally unplayable shit
That's from their curator shit. Informative is for when the person isn't giving a proper review.
Fan? Yes or no. That's a bit simple. It should be more of a if you like game a, b or c you'll like game d. Little more specific and captures the idea.
The 1 - 5 system with no decimals unless using an average/aggregate score will always be the golden standard for me.
Easy to read and clear what each value is.
1 - a true disaster and complete garbage
2 - it's bad, but there might be a small amount of enjoyment there
3 - average, might be forgettable but it doesn't do anything terrible
4 - good, you probably want to try this
5 - near perfect, it's quality is unmatched
Several years after people adapt to this easy to read and understand system that has some good predictive algorithms behind it we'll toss it for an upvote/downvote system that can't predict shit.
Anyone who has ever cared about game review scores is an idiot anyways. Only thing you should do when considering playing a game is look at gameplay or any video that displays the qualities of the game.
There*
It's "they're" m8
I prefer the 1-10 scale used by the big review sites, desu
>1 - bad, or too hard
>2 - bad, or too hard
>3 - bad, or too hard
>4 - bad, or too hard
>5 - bad, or too hard
>6 - bad, or too hard
>7 - bad, or too hard
>8 good, but didn't bribe the reviewer
>9 you must bribe the reviewer to get this score
>10 - literally ads for the game on the review site
The baseline for average is still highly subjective, though.