Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bloodhawk
I totally support the TC, but I'd only want to see 1-10 scores instead of 1-100. Scoring is a nice little thumbnail, but 1-5 scoring NEVER works, for whatever reason, people tend to dish out 5s like it's the status quo, whereas most people will be happy with giving even some of their favorite things 8-9s.
|
Well, If forced to, I will rate things on a Five Star basis... however, on my reviews, and if at all possible, I have been known to give scores based on a 10 number scale. Occasionally a 1.1 1.2 1.3 etc. scale.
It is true, though. If something gets "Five Stars", it often means less than if something gets "10 Points" or "10 Stars".
Part of this is that something that is achem, "COMPLETELY AWESOME" might get rated 5 Stars because it was really good. That same game might get rated a 8.9 in a ten point scale.
It's almost like they round in a 5 Star/Point scale. Kindof like " Well, this game only deserves a 8.5 out of ten, but I'm going to give it Five out of five because bad isn't bad enough to put the score down lower to a four."
Some of it is personal taste, and mood.
Also, it's to be noticed that, to the extent of my knowledge, ALL games have flaws. Some are small, some are large, some are so miniscule you may not even realize that they're there, but there really is no "Perfect Game".
For instance, DOOM. A loved and cherished classic. Flaws?
Sure. Can't look up or down.
Uses sprites for enemies.
Of course, these "Flaws" are only "Flaws" in personal opinion.
Some people may love sprites for enemies.
I actually like them, myself.
From a neutral standpoint, however, from hindsight with games with 3D characters, I would call it a "Flaw". Although that definition is HIGHLY subjective, considering at the time they didn't have 3D models readily available to them, and therefor it was more of a "Lacking" than a "Flaw", back then. However, when it was released, it was neither a Flaw or a Lacking because 3D models and Looking up and down didn't exist yet.
It's hard to say DOOM was flawed. Essentially, though, all human creations are flawed. Humans aren't perfect, so why would their creations be perfect?
They aren't! Whether that "Flaw" is actually annoying to you or not, or whether that "Flaw" doesn't even come to your attention until years later, it doesn't change the fact that it was just something they didn't do.
Sometimes you could blame them, as they were negligent. Other times, it's technology that out-does them.
Anyway, the point of all this is, that you can't argue that a game is flawless. It's all opinion, and where others see nothing you may see an ugly sore.
Which is why the "5 Star" rating doesn't really make sense.
Of course, in the sense of it as a rating system, it would proclaim "Absolutely flawless! No faults! Nothing Wrong!" Sometimes, though, it's simply used as another way of saying "Great. Very good. Exceptional."
I personally don't take it all too seriously. (Possibly contrarily to my "Wall O' Text" here) After all, Everything is so subjective. The inclusion of machine guns in Medal of Honor (In reference to the first MoH game, on PS1) may make some people like the game more. (That would be most people)
Some people could immediately stop playing the game for that very same reason, because they can't stand MG's. (LOL)
Sometimes when rating a game, it's more "What do you think of it, from a semi-subjective point of view" than "What should you say of it".
Like, I've rated a game 10 out of ten before. Was I saying the game was "Flawless"? Well, in my state of mind, in my opinion, perhaps.
Probably not though. I am more conveying the fact that "There are very few games which I like this much", not "This game is literally perfect in every way".
Perhaps "This is one of my All-time Favorites".
In some cases, I've written a review with Gamespot's Rating system, where I gave my personal rating, and my rating based on all the comparisons that could made in the gaming world. Ironically, I looked up that title, (Iron Man 2 for Wii) and my "Game World" rating was within .5 points of theirs. Amazing.
The reason I gave a separate rating for each?
Well, in my mind, my personal rating was going to be much too jaded to use it as a formal rating. (I've never actually had any reviews published, though)
For instance, I absolutely love certain movie/comic/game franchises. Like Iron Man. I love Iron man so much, and games in general, that even a mediocre effort would retain my interest and love.
I will always rate a 5 out of ten game 7.8 because of my franchise love.
It's just the way I am. Possibly even higher than that.
Part of it:
I haven't played the latest, most ultimate games.
Another Part of It:
I tend to like games in general a bit more than most people.
Sometimes I will rate something 10 points. Other times I may say 2.5.
All in all it varies from if I'm trying to form an accurate game community opinion, or my personal opinion.
However, yes, in most situations I will give a game I really like a 8 or 9. However, like I said, my personal usage of "10" can sometimes be "This game is one of my all-time favorites", not "Flawless". This would be why I would give things like "Star Wars: Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast" and "Delta Force: Black Hawk Down" 10 out of 10.
To sum up, If I say 10, I mean 10 in my personal opinion. "Flawless" in someone's personal opinion is quite different than "Flawless" in someone's "Grand scheme of the world" opinion. In my mind, if I find no fault or annoyance with a Flaw of a game's, it might as well not be a flaw. That doesn't change the fact that it's there, and others will acknowledge that. However, if I were to shift gears in one of my favorite games, I could very come up with some things that are flawed or messed up.
Not as many as someone who dislikes the genre, but I would still have a few, since remember, most of my "10" games are 5 to 8.9 games from the eyes of the world.
Anyway, it's all so hokey, but reviews and ratings are simply for enjoyment and learning more about the game, and getting a feel for how good it is from a critic's/another person's standpoint.
Personally, I think they should use Gamespot's 10 point score system with .1 .2 .3 etc.! I would at least do increments of .5 on a scale of ten.
Also, it would be cool if they had a "World of Gaming" rating and a "This Reviewer's" rating. unfortunately that idea doesn't fit in too well because all of the games being reviewed are old DOS games. It could work, though. maybe a "World of Retro Gaming Comparisons" rating?
As I said, if ANYONE has any cool action, possibly other genre, games I could review on Abandonia or for Abandoned Times, PLZ contact me @
StaaViinsZ@Yahoo.com or PM here. Heck, leave a guestbook post on my website
www.kittengalaxy.webs.com or
www.staaviinsz.webs.com!
Reply to a comment of mine on Yahoo! Even comment on a Photo of mine on Flickr (StaaViinsZ) or find me on Facebook! (Starvio Steves)
Now I've written my own Wall Of Text, (WOT, pronounced WHOT when you see the wall I've created in your face, LOL!) just for Abandonia. Oh yeah, and there's that guy I was replying to, hmm, let me scroll to the top... oh yeah, heh, "The Bloodhawk".
Ain't No Joke, When Your Nose Gets Poked.
StaaViinsZ (Pronounced Stavins Z, not "stah-vi-i-nsz")