Yes, in a perfect world this would always be true. IGN has a different take though.Except previews and reviews are written and edited by seperate departments have separate uses and as you describe, previews serve to hype and reviews critique and inform.
By claiming a preview is a review you are crediting a piece of work to a staff that had nothing to do with the piece.
Joe is dumb for doing it.
Except previews and reviews are written and edited by seperate departments have separate uses and as you describe, previews serve to hype and reviews critique and inform.
By claiming a preview is a review you are crediting a piece of work to a staff that had nothing to do with the piece.
Joe is dumb for doing it.
8.9 = Almost amazing but not quite
9.0 = Legit amazing
Simple.
Because two immature babies arguing on the internet is an accurate representation for the current state of the US.
Painting with mighty broad strokes there.
Well to be fair you have to draw the line somewhere. It probably means something along the lines of "this game is great, and when compared to the other games which are great it's one of the best of those games." You can't just be like "eh 8.9 means both amazing and great," because you do have to draw a line.Holy shit, this blew my mind.. what the hell kind of thinking is this. Where a 0.1 determines whether something is great or amazing.. haha, oh man...
Except previews and reviews are written and edited by seperate departments have separate uses and as you describe, previews serve to hype and reviews critique and inform.
By claiming a preview is a review you are crediting a piece of work to a staff that had nothing to do with the piece.
Joe is dumb for doing it.
The straw that broke the camel's metacritic bonus.
lol. The review scale is so fucked.
Except previews and reviews are written and edited by seperate departments have separate uses and as you describe, previews serve to hype and reviews critique and inform.
By claiming a preview is a review you are crediting a piece of work to a staff that had nothing to do with the piece.
8.9 = Almost amazing but not quite
9.0 = Legit amazing
Simple.
IGN looking really petty right about now, 0.1 lmfao. Why not go a few steps further, 8.9915 - so great it's almost amazing.
Except previews and reviews are written and edited by seperate departments have separate uses and as you describe, previews serve to hype and reviews critique and inform.
By claiming a preview is a review you are crediting a piece of work to a staff that had nothing to do with the piece.
Joe is dumb for doing it.
There is no need for granular scores like this. A x out of 10 system basically works like thisNumbered game review scores are a joke and have been for a while. They all ignore 90% of the numbers and live in the 8-10 range. Thats crazy.
It should be something like
0 - DONT BUY, dont even think about buying
1 - getting it as a gift for free is ok, otherwise avoid
2 - Rental at best
3 - buying it used is ideal, but make sure you research the game a bit first
4 - not bad, not day 1, but its a fun game
5 - get it day 1 if you are a big fan, otherwise its a good game
6 - pretty fun game, should check it out
7 - great game, you should totally check it out, worth $60
8 - REALLY great game, worth $60 day 1 easily
9 - Amazing game, will always be known for being a great game and a classic. day 1, $60 everyone should buy
10 - If you don't buy it, you are insane. Something to enjoy in the game for anyone. Great writing, graphics, audio, everything top notch.
All the above come with the reminder that it applies only if you like that genre of game as some people just dont like certain genres such as RPG or TBS or FPS. If its your genre the chart applies to you.
There should never be any decimal points. Arguing that an 8.9 is a totally different level than a 9 is crazy when you are dealing with the decimals and quality of a game. When someone sells something for $59.99 you dont think, "oh that is a totally different price than $60.00....TECHNICALLY it is, but realistically it isnt.
The IGN preview was published and is therefore fair game to criticism. If they want to argue semantics of whether it was a review or preview (let's be fair, it is a rough draft of their review, a preview of the review), they can, but it looks extremely silly if not unprofessional, especially since it was PUBLISHED. The difference to me between Joe and IGN, is that IGN are supposed to be the professionals, and Joe is just some guy from Youtube. He's an amateur. You expect him to argue over Twitter, whether he's in the right or not (and to me, he's far more in the right here than Dan Stapleton).
In either case, Joe's point stands - the game is fun, but it doesn't deserve a score anywhere near 9 or 10. What's crazy about IGN's final review is that it mentions quite a few of the problems of Titanfall, yet still gives the game an 8.9 out of 10. That seems extremely shady.
I like Kotaku's review scale. Should you buy this game: Yes or No. That's all you really need. Anything else you need to know they'll tell you in the summary of the review or you can read the entire review for yourself.
Going to go with Joe on this one. Sure he could've not resort to name calling, but the IGN guy is just to much. Fighting over .1 is crazy.
You guys laugh about this, but remember Double Dash's 7.9 and how much that generated furor. It's the same mentality as to not making a B grade because of one percentage point.https://twitter.com/DanStapleton/status/456713748854501377
@lilc202 @AngryJoeShow That's exactly what it means. 8 is a category that means great. 9 is a category that means amazing.
So, 8.0-8.9 means its "great" but 9.0+ means "amazing".
lol Dan.
Good one.
How about:
8.9 = No single player campaign mode
9.0 = Single Player campaign mode
8.9 = best great game
9.0 = worst amazing game
Finally, a sane reply.Some people have too much free time
I wish review sites would do away with grading system. Just have your readers read the god damn review.
I like how quick you guys are to jump on IGN just because you hate them. Angry Joe is clearly in the wrong here. He quoted a preview quote and made it look like was part of their review, then he claims they gave it a 9 when they didn't. Then angry Joe calls him names the entire time.
Angry Joe is the idiot in this argument.
Or the difference between a yellow or green on metacritic or an exact score, which affects dev bonuses and sales of the game. Such a flawed system. It's not like games were selling less before such important was placed on metacritic and arbitrary exact scores.
Sessler explains it well
I feel sorry for Dan Stapleton he has so much more to lose than Angry Joe. Angry Joe doesn't really have to worry about future and current employers as much as Dan has to.
There is no need for granular scores like this. A x out of 10 system basically works like this
<7 avoid
7 meh
8 good
9 great
10 masterpiece
There really isn't much more information you need from the number in a review, the text will do the rest. The scale from 0-10 is stupid since it isn't used, but it's not really a problem. Giving scores like 8.x definitely is, because the decimal means nothing.
Not that simple at all, which has been very well explained throughout the thread.I like how quick you guys are to jump on IGN just because you hate them. Angry Joe is clearly in the wrong here. He quoted a preview quote and made it look like was part of their review, then he claims they gave it a 9 when they didn't. Then angry Joe calls him names the entire time.
Angry Joe is the idiot in this argument.
The .1 difference is stupid but I feel that the IGN guy has a legitimate point about showing a preview when talking about reviews.