How do you perceive review scores?
- Thread starter Thesnipergecko
- Start date
This... Unless something gets an utter panning across the board I'll just go with what I think I'll like. I would far rather trust the people on here than review sites with an agenda.
As for scores, it seems the heard consider anything less than an 8/10 a total fail, which seems a very odd way to look at things... 5/10 should mean average, anything below poor.
For instance, from what I've seen of Killzone I know I'm going to enjoy it, regardless of what some review sites says.
I don't.
It's someone else's opinion on something out of ten. I'm more interested in reading about how they thought it was, and seeing a general idea from those playing it. Or even as said above, watch some game play footage or video review to decide on it myself.
But i'm guessing this stems from that site giving the PS4 a 7.5? (iirc). Something like that is deserved in my opinion, for both consoles.
IGN Rating system:
0-8.9 Mediocre
9-10 Call of Duty
It's someone else's opinion on something out of ten. I'm more interested in reading about how they thought it was, and seeing a general idea from those playing it. Or even as said above, watch some game play footage or video review to decide on it myself.
But i'm guessing this stems from that site giving the PS4 a 7.5? (iirc). Something like that is deserved in my opinion, for both consoles.
IGN Rating system:
0-8.9 Mediocre
9-10 Call of Duty
In your opinion of course
Hence this topic, it's interesting to see how others treat scores.
I wouldn't consider 8 a high score, 9/10 would be a high scorer for me. 8 would be top end of an average game.
Yeah true, some of my favourite games this gen eg phantasy star universe and mirrors edge didn't get incredible reviews but I still liked them, I just tend not to have the time /inclination to bother these days =p
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 3,030
- Location
- Nottingham
Most of my favorite games usually score about an 8. Usually implies they are great, but "different" enough that they may alienate the mainstream who in the majority are retarded and flock to the usual mundane CoDs.
Proper gamers games, as such.
I do like me an 8.
A straight 10 is rarely deserved, especially those bloody Call of Duty games.
Proper gamers games, as such.
I do like me an 8.
A straight 10 is rarely deserved, especially those bloody Call of Duty games.
1-3 - Majorly flawed
4-6 - Only try it if I like the genre (typically FPS)
7-9 - Good game, will keep an eye out in sales
10 - Outstanding and should probably try even if it takes me out of my comfort zone (FPS/Racing/RPG)
Indeed. Basically anything under 70% is deemed to be mediocre at best, and anything under 50% a plain bad game. It's kind of a self-perpetuating situation however, because games are now judged effectively against other games and then that is used to derive the score. So if game X is average and got 70-80% and game Y is also average better it will get something in a similar range.
Someone mentioned Eurogamer earlier and to be fair I see them use a wider range. They'll (sometimes) give a genuinely bad game 2-3/10 and a genuinely good game 7/10 but reading the review you can tell it's a good game rather than going "oh 7/10 must be pretty average".
I play a little metagame on the rare occasions I read reviews, whereby based on what I've read I try to predict the score it will get at the end. Oftentimes it works thusly:
AAA game, positive review = low 90s
Sleeper hit / relatively unknown studio, positive review = high 80s
Any game with understated praise = low-80s
AAA game, mediocore review = mid-70s
Relatively unknown game/studio, mediocre review = 50-65
etc
4-6 - Only try it if I like the genre (typically FPS)
7-9 - Good game, will keep an eye out in sales
10 - Outstanding and should probably try even if it takes me out of my comfort zone (FPS/Racing/RPG)
Indeed. Basically anything under 70% is deemed to be mediocre at best, and anything under 50% a plain bad game. It's kind of a self-perpetuating situation however, because games are now judged effectively against other games and then that is used to derive the score. So if game X is average and got 70-80% and game Y is also average better it will get something in a similar range.
Someone mentioned Eurogamer earlier and to be fair I see them use a wider range. They'll (sometimes) give a genuinely bad game 2-3/10 and a genuinely good game 7/10 but reading the review you can tell it's a good game rather than going "oh 7/10 must be pretty average".
I play a little metagame on the rare occasions I read reviews, whereby based on what I've read I try to predict the score it will get at the end. Oftentimes it works thusly:
AAA game, positive review = low 90s
Sleeper hit / relatively unknown studio, positive review = high 80s
Any game with understated praise = low-80s
AAA game, mediocore review = mid-70s
Relatively unknown game/studio, mediocre review = 50-65
etc
Last edited:
As someone else's opinion. a person I don't know at all.
Sometimes I read reviews, but with a pinch of salt. I watch some gameplay videos to get an idea and I take into account who is the developer more than reviews. (ie Naughty Dog, Bethesda = quality / EA, Activision is average / Sega usually crap)
The only thing I trust are demos.
Sometimes I read reviews, but with a pinch of salt. I watch some gameplay videos to get an idea and I take into account who is the developer more than reviews. (ie Naughty Dog, Bethesda = quality / EA, Activision is average / Sega usually crap)
The only thing I trust are demos.
Last edited:
I don't really give the score much attention.
I tend to read reviews from people, sites or magazines I trust.
I know it's taken for granted, but just game play videos on YouTube are a good way of getting a 'feel' for the game too, I really don't like the people who do 'lets play' type videos or voice overs, but just a few minutes of game play are usually enough to back up a good reviewer
.
I tend to read reviews from people, sites or magazines I trust.
I know it's taken for granted, but just game play videos on YouTube are a good way of getting a 'feel' for the game too, I really don't like the people who do 'lets play' type videos or voice overs, but just a few minutes of game play are usually enough to back up a good reviewer
.
Not much attention, I've played plenty of games that get a 3 or less out of 10 and enjoyed them more than ones that get perfect scores.
All nonsense really, plays toward the fanboys and the people buying good reviews is all, I'll read them to see what it's all about or to grab some new information about a game I'm interested in but wont pay attention to how its scored.
All nonsense really, plays toward the fanboys and the people buying good reviews is all, I'll read them to see what it's all about or to grab some new information about a game I'm interested in but wont pay attention to how its scored.