How do we fix this?
How do we fix this
>>735953214Switch to a 1 to 5 scale
>>735953214Number reviews are for people that can't read
Abandon it in favour of recommended/not recommended, because, at the end of the day, that's all that matters.
>>735953214number scales are epic kinothe "journalists" don't play the games they rate, nor do they have the slightest idea about what makes games good, and yet the only issues with their scores are that the numbers are too close together
>>735953214You can thank review sites like IGN for perpetuating this skewed scale.
>>735953214Everybody would have to stop reading early reviews or looking at metcritic scores before release because the reason this shit gets inflated is because the reviewers are afraid of getting blacklisted from preview builds.
>>735953312That won't fix it. You know how many people won't buy something because it has a rating lower than a 4/5? The solution is that there is none. People are retarded and there's no fixing it. Let it be.
>>735953486It's absolutely baffling how I can't find a single part of that image that doesn't make me angry.
>>735953214people are the problemthere are too many 9/10 games to playeasy to ignore those below as trash not worth the time
>3-4Jank>6-7Above average>7-8Good>9Great>10Paid review
>>735953214What if we had rotten tomatoes but for games? That way you can ignore games with high critic scores and play games with high actual person scores
>>735953486>Innovative>Tacticool>DLC as plus>9.0 its okay>GOTYIm mad
>>735953486This is probably the most infuriating, insane thing I've seen tiday, maybe this week.
>>735953214>How do we fix this?Review the games that nobody wants to buy.
I would never play a 5/10 game or below. Gaming is already a waste a time. If I'm gonna play a game, it better be at least above-average. Why would I waste my time on an average game?
>>735953963We do, it's called steam reviews
>>735953214Three point scale0- nobody will like this1-fans of the genre will like this2- everyone will like this
>>735953931Hold on, what numbers represent above average?
>>735953214Use more colors bottom one makes it look like 7and lower are shit
>>735953214Switch to a thumbs up or down system. People should elaborate on why they gave it that in their reviews. People shouldn't look at the average thumb, but instead look at all the reviews to decide whether the game is a flop or not.
Reviews should be peer-reviewed. Not a single entity deciding the score. There should also be separate entity making sure there is no corruption between publishers and reviews.
>>735953214it's big 2026 just go watch some game footagereviews are over
>>735954847Based idealistic Anon.
Why should we expect ratings to be linear or work the same anyway?5/10 is like, the perfect middle of the road in the sense that if it was any worse, it would be actively unpleasant or underperforming. Like a food that would go from "whatever" to "kind of bad" if it was any worse.A 5/10 pen/pencil is pretty serviceable and gets the job done for 99% of what you need during everyday activities. Food that tastes 5/10 (neutral) can be perfectly great, What if its super nutritive, quick to eat and cost effective? A 5/10 hotel is often perfect depending on what you need from oneA videogame though?? You play a videogame to have FUN. Its meant to be a really fucking entertaining thing, theres different ways in which it can be fun but its a genre actively trying to be very entertaining. If a game is a 5/10 it genuinely fucking sucks. If it was any worse, it would actively be more unfun or annoying than actually fun. Its not even good enough for the bad or bland to outweight the good.A game that is 7/10 is alright, but theres genuinely a sea of 7/10 games out there, getting 7/10 experiences is not that hardVidya were genuinely born to be a 8/10 or higher. If your game is a mere 6-7/10 then thats alright, but theres just way too many 8-9/10 games to play for me to get too excited about yours.
>>735957224But how do you know which of those 8-9 games are good?
>>735953214You have it with sites like meta critic and steam. Mostly with meta critic where you can compare customer vs journalist. Even with movies/shows nowadays no one actually respects critics anymore. Its a lost art
>>735953214yeah PSone games if you played a 7 the game worked and everyone was happy it was good and fun for 1 play. 8 was a keeper and 9 to 10 were the best experiences you can get for your money for the year. 6 had flaws that unless you liked the genre would kill your pleasure. they also included plot and music in their reviewing. if you had shit music in your game they would tell you. game play was also important because they would geek on any new mechanic in gaming that was revealed. Nowadays there should really be a point substraction system for lacking originality especially with games that have done it in the past. Like the latest COD should get a -3 for doing the same fucking formula over and over again. Part of the reason why I went ballistic over Dynasty Warriors for years because they never improved until Origins somehow making an insanely polished and good evolution of their game.
>>735957314He doesn't because the number doesn't actually deconstruct what makes those games good. Video game journalists have never used analytical margins or justifications for their scores in over 25 years. A fucking quarter of the century.
Change the United States' education grading system.>0-59%F, catastrophic failing grade.>60%-69%D, still failing.>70%-79%C, barely passing.>80%-89%B, solid work.>90%-100%A, fantastic work.It's what people knew, so it was applied to other things in life after school was over.
>>735953486>preorder dlc>+fuck those retards
>>735953214publicly execute all games 'journalists'
>>735953214Kill all journosOh also only text reviews
>>735953214it was never like the bottom scale.
Who gives a fuck?>see game that looks interesting>watch a bit of gameplay>read negative user reviews that list all the flaws>decide whether you wanna buy it
This is unironically a direct reflection of America's grading standards in school. If you don't have a 3.5+ gpa you are perceived as an idiot so schools have been inflating grades and now a maximum grade which should be reserved for the absolute best is more widespread than subway restaurants.
>>735957314what do you mean? the 8-9/10 games are good
>>735957770This is what i do too. But i think this constant review score inflation, self-backpatting and hype culture has made games worse over all. That is games havent improved in decades.
>>735957314>Play game>Have 8-9/10 fun >Rate game 8-9/10
>>735953214 (OP) (OP)Both scales are idiotic. The top scale is just absurd. The bottom scale is almost ideal but 3 to 4 is not mediocre.Here is an improved bottom scale. Three to four is below average. Four to six is average. Six to seven is above average. Seven to eight is good. Eight to nine is very good. Nine to ten is great and worthy of game of the year considerations. Below nine is not worthy of game of the year.
Review scores don't matter now that YouTube is a thing that you can easily use to look at gameplay and decide for yourself. Thanks for looking.
>>735957831Show me a game from past 5 years with score between 8-9 that was actually good
>>735953486niggers
>>735953214Stop consuming modern media.
>>735957983>score between 8-9just for clarification, i was talking personal scores. in order to answer your question do you want personal scores, user scores or metacritic/gay journo scores?
>>735957627Pretty much. Nothing wrong with this.
I like the 4 point scale.Excellent > Good > Mediocre > BadThere's no point splitting hairs on a 10 or worse 100 point scale, especially when people tend to give decimal scores which basically makes 10 point into 100 point anyway.
>>735957627People who think school grades and media scores are remotely comparable are fucking retarded and lack any critical thinking skills.
>>735953214Your example for 80s/90s/early 00s is insanely ahistoric. It was always like this.As for "how do we fix this?" The problem is larger than games journalism. The 1-10 grading scale for games closely resembles the American grading scaling in schools. Anything below 60% is a failure, and anything below a 90% isn't an A. You basically have to rewrite an entire larger culture to fix this.
Product-centric reviews are the mistake. Games must be judged on the sociopolitcal scale. Is this game sold to foreigners and domestic enemies? If yes, then it's treason and must be destroyed along with its developers. If no, then it must be judged on the contribution it makes toward the inspiration of valor and duty it brings forth to the generation of men playing it, as necessary for the sustainment of our mighty advancement in the war on the enemies of our nation.
>>735958813Lmao someone else says it right after my post too. School ratings are for ranking how well a person understands a subject, while media rankings are an attempt to describe how "quality" (or enjoyable) a piece if media is. They aren't remotely the same thing. Anyone who fails to be able to separate the purposes of the two ranking systems is a retard
>>735958782Why? How?
5 star system is best1=bad2=ok3=good4=great5=amazingNo half stars. Once it's bad it's bad you don't need multiple numbers dedicated to what extent it is bad.
>>735960059The school scoring system is based around objective metrics where a problem has a correct answer. You get points by answering questions correctly. Subjects that don't have objective metrics are scaled for consistency. In contrast, video games are always subjective and will never have objective metrics that you could use to assign points. The only metric is how well one game accomplishes its design goals compared to another game. A scoring system that focuses on a relative comparison makes more sense than one that focuses on how well a game accomplishes objective metrics that don't exist to accomplish.
>>735961779>In contrast, video games are always subjective and will never have objective metrics that you could use to assign points.So what you're actually arguing about is not the scale but instead that video games shouldn't be scored in the first place?
>>735953486>pre-order dlc>+thanks i hate it
>>735961779>he doesnt know
>>735962005I am making an argument for why the school scoring system is different from how you would want to review a game. You can say that one game is better than another, but you can't come up with a universal list of things to deduct points over to explain why one game is better than another. If you are going to assign a score, the only thing that makes sense is to start from an average and go up or down rather than starting from perfect and making deductions.That said, I actually do agree with your statement. Steam's user reviews work the best for me since "worth playing" and "not worth planing" are the only outcomes that matter.
>>735953214False premise. It’s always been a 7-10 scale.
>>735953312If you rate the game on a 1-5 scale, then add 5 points and say it's out of 10, you basically get the modern 1-10 scale.
>>735959178You are not free of the culture you were raised in.If you are taught from an early age that 60% is the bare minimum to pass, and that 90% is the start of when you're allowed to call something good, that's going to impact how you rate things on a scale of 1-10.
>>735953486Is this real?
>>735953884>>735953976>>735954159>>735957637>>735962163It's an edit
>>735953214How does this affect you?
>>735953312Make that a thumbs up or thumbs down scale.
>>735953214get every single reviewer and gamer to play the absolute bottom of the barrel shovelware on steam every day for a whole year or else their dicks get chopped offall those 'average' 8s would look like gotys
>>735953214Simply delete 95% of games being released nowadays. The market is absolutely oversaturated.Back then, if a game was a 7/10 in a genre that you liked with a setting that you liked, it was absolutely worth playing. And if you had already played all the 7+/10 games that interested you, you'd absolutely look at 6/10 games and below.Nowadays there's a thousand games with 8/10 or 9/10 gameplay (perfected according to industry standards) of any given niche genre, setting or aesthetic you might like. You can decide "hmm today I want to play an uhhh sci-fi side-scrolling action shooter" or "today I want to play a lovecraftian fantasy puzzle adventure game" and easily find hundreds of games matching this, with at least dozens of them being objectively well made.So you will never run out of 9/10 and 10/10 games to play, meaning there is literally never a reason to waste your valuable time looking at games worse than that.
>>735953214To remedy this, I propose a 20 point scale, where 19 is practically unplayable and 20 is either mediocre, good, great, or GOTY. Anyways, idiots have always wanted score inflation. I had an EGM subscription in the late 90s and 2000s, they were always posting hatemail because one of their reviewers really liked a game and rated it 7 or 8/10. They would always explain that their scale had 5 as an average game and so 7 or 8 is well above average. 9 or 10 being more for GOTY or even not necessarily given every year. They kept explaining it and the hate mail kept coming.
>>735964573I used to read EGM a bunch as a teen which is probably why I view 5 or 6 as good enough to play, hell I would even play a 4/10 game if it was the right genre/theme and has gameplay elements I likeA game like Hydrophobia would probably be like a 4/10 but that water physics tech was so cool that I still played it to the end
>>735957627Okay, what do we do about it, change it so a pass is 40% to match OP's scale?You can't fix it this way. Tards are gonna tard.
>>735964106Makes him save money from not buying 8/10 dogshit.
