Multiply by Pi then divide by 0.
1 Like
It can’t be.
If you want ‘OK’/‘Average’/‘Mediocre’ to be in the middle, then you can’t have a ten point scale.
As you can see from IGN’s scale, you just end up using synonyms to pad the list out.
S - Masterpiece A - Excellent B - Good C - OK D - Sub par E - Bad F - Unacceptable
Any distinctions between those ranks is not an appreciable difference in quality.
What do we gain by doing this?:
S: Masterpiece A+: Really Amazing A: Amazing B: Good C: OK D: Sub par D- Really sub par E: Bad E-: Really Bad F: Unacceptable
We get people ignoring us. That’s what every site with a ten point scale tries, and it’s always rejected.
People know that if it didn’t fall in the top three tiers, it’s just OK, and if it didn’t fall in the fourth, it’s bad. You’ll never convince them otherwise.
Well, I wrote a 10-scale before that I think works? You get too caught up in what words they use to describe each tier.
You also make the mistake of comparing games. Unless it’s a series, or the exact same genre you can’t compare games like that. Each game is judged based on it’s own merits and it all boils down to “how fun is this to play?” really. Forza Horizon 3 and 4, you can compare scores. RDR2 and Yooka-Laylee, not so much.
As for the 10 scale, again, it makes a lot of sense. Like any other scale it has it’s problems, in this case mostly that it isn’t used properly by the people scoring games.
The perfect scale is probably 3 tiers:
Yes - Maybe - No.
If you want to be more precise you add steps to each category but that is when you end up with too many things like we have now.
I think this makes sense, if you have to use a scale of 1-10.
I think if you’re going to use tiers, they need to carry the right amount of information. Too little or too much and it’s counter productive. Seven is perfect.
The issue with your ten point scale is the same as all the others – people intuitively reject it.
Look at this thread, with people concerned about the ‘low’ (by your scale, good) reviews for the Ascent.
Look at Sony, reportedly not allowing sequels of games that metacritic under 8. Are they saying it needs to be ‘Amazing’ or are the actually saying what we all intuitively understand the scale to mean – that it needs to review as ‘good’?
Pissing against the wind to fight it.
It does, but no one will accept that is what the numbers mean.
They will see a ‘six’ as ‘five discernable tiers down from the best’ and won’t want to buy it.
Let’s get the US on the metric system and then we can tackle this.
2 Likes
Just because someone has a right to their opinion doesn’t make it right. And in the case of this game getting a 3, I’m inclined to believe the reviewer should probably not speak a whole lot on video games in general and should keep their mouths shut. A 3 is indicative of a terrible game, in which this one is not by any stretch of the imagination. Reviewers in general are giving the craft of journalism a really, really bad name these days. It’s unfortunate.
1 Like
But what’s a terrible game to the reviewer might be a great game to you. There are plenty of games sitting in the 90’s on MC that I’d not give more than a 5 to. It’s personal opinion. I’ve played the ascent and I’d probably from my perspective say it’s a 6/10 game. That’s me. You do you. But metro have a different scale for reviews than many and are more polarising. It’s their choice.
The guy must be a very sad person that doesn’t like video games or there is a really serious conflict of interest going on there. A 3 for this games feels like an insult to the intelegence of anyone that at least tried the game for a couple hours. It is not a matter of liking or not the game, the ascent is not a terrible game whatever is the stupid criterion or scale you choose to review it.
Agreed. Any score below a 6-7 for this game is super suspicious.
1 Like
Finally worked up the nerve to click on that Metro review, to see what the justification for the 3 out of 10 was. Spoiler: didn’t find anything that remotely made sense in that review. What I did find was that that site is actually a Trash Tabloid News site. And they don’t even put a name on who the reviewer is in their reviews
How the hell does a place like that get on Metacritic???
3 Likes
2 Likes
“We do our very best to pair games to team members that are fans of the genre or series, in order to ensure it’s being viewed from a place of experience.”
I’ve read a lot of reviews on other sites, where this most certainly did not seem to be the case and it drives me mad
Really glad to see this is a priority here
3 Likes
It doesn’t make any sense, especially sites that have reviewers and journalists who hate Xbox but who’s job is to cover Xbox hardware and games.
Hell I just read a review of the new Grand Tour special from someone who states plainly that they absolutely hate the show, not a shocker that it was a negative review.
Thanks for the unintentional reminder to watch that! It entirely fell off my radar.
I’m amazed at how much time people put in to things they hate. That’s not my life’s philosophy, not sure exactly what it is, but I know it’s at least to spend time doing what you love and enjoy. Maybe they love to hate? shrug
2 Likes
I use a 0-10 rating scale.
- Abysmal
- Awful
- Bad
- Poor
- Below Average
- Average
- Above Average
- Good
- Great
- Excellent
- Superb
However, I have four categories. Visuals, audio, gameplay and story/characters. All four get a 0-10 rating. The average becomes the overall score. And I use half point increments. So 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5, etc. I do have a fifth category but it’s for open world games only as it’s for optional side content like Tsushima, Assassin’s Creed, etc.
Half point ratings is also great for a category where say I rate it a 7.5/10, it’s better than good but not quite great. Everyone has their own setup.
My main issue with critic reviews is that they only give the overall score which I don’t think is accurate because what are the strengths and weaknesses of the game? At least, with a category setup, it can showcase the strengths and weaknesses a lot better.
1 Like
The game is rad so far. My one complaint is the lack of direction generally. I took a side quest for an area I couldn’t yet access despite the level requirement being Level 2. I then grabbed that stasis side quest and didn’t know how to use stasis until I came across it in the augmentation shop. I also have zero clue what I’m looking at in the skill menu. I just click the attributes I want after leveling up and hope I have enough skill points or whatever because I genuinely don’t know what’s happening.
I give zero tucks what metro says. Because they wear the “journalist” badge and claim to be professionals doesn’t make it so. And even less when speaking on their opinion of games. Their scale of reviewing games is flawed AF. Gamers are raking them over the coles on numerous sites as we speak. Hardly anyone agrees with their “dare to be different” views about this game. Their opinion is inaccurate. Point blank done.