Just a suggestion: if we are reviewing old games, why not using some of the old ways.
For instance, local magazine had 4 tracks of values (usually from 1 to 10) for each game. I mean, that was before 2000 and they finally switched to 100 points system. But I saw similar things in other countries as well.
Why valuing game from 1 t0 10 or 100, when you could/should value graphics, sound, gameplay and similar. And you try to value that according to the time that the game was released, an people will get better idea of the game.
As I mentioned local magazine (back in first half of 90es) every game had same 3 tracks: visual (graphics etc), audio (music, quality of effects) and controls (speed, hardness and similar). The fourth track was different for the game's genre. Platforms and actions had atmosphere, adventures had scenario quality, simulations had some kind of realism/gameplay valuing etc.
We don't have to use different tracks for different genres, we could simply value atmosphere instead of controls and gameplay as general satisfaction of "how the game goes", and keep it at 4 tracks. Or 3 or 5, whatever we choose, those games were reviewed in many magazines this way at that time, why not do it in similar way?
If we are valuing games with single value, then 1-10 with half values (5.6, 6.5, 7.5) is enough IMO. But why don't we give more info if we can?
|