herod said:
they average 7 because they don't review the obvious shit that places like IGN cover.
plenty of games have scored sub-5 scores, the point is, a 1-2 type game will just be totally broken (Facebreaker was an Edge 2/10). Something like 4/10 in an unpopular genre may be something that serious fans or collectors will want to pick up anyway.
the problem here is that you think Edge are providing a buyers guide, instead of just grading something that has some kind of significance in the 'core' end of the market.
A review is an opinion on a piece of media, and the reason we have "reviews" is to inform consumers as to that medias quality. The fact that they don't review shit is completely irrelevant, if I was running a high performance car magazine I wouldn't alternate between scores of 8, 9 and 10 to reflect they are better than most cars, thats obvious.
A review scale should only exist as to make each number useful. Knowing if a game is a 1 or a 2 isn't useful. Knowing if a game is a 2 or a 4 isn't useful. Knowing if a game is a 9 or a 10 isn't useful. Look at the critics in any other field, like movies, do you see many 1-10 scales? No. Because its a ridiculous grading system to begin with.
EmCeeGramr said:
Have you considered the fact that most games arent complete shit these days? Ive played things that dont gel with me, but I wouldnt say their failures and are worthless wastes of shelf space. You also have to realize that a multiplatform mag cant dedicate space to shovelware, so the other half of the scale is going to show up when mid tier efforts come along and fall on their face.
Everything is relative. If all games are great then the scale moves to separate them even further. If we were at a time period where everything was amazing should we be using a 1-10 scale when everything is scoring 9+?
RandomVince said:
Edit: ffs. Why does every edge review thread turn into a discussion on scores and averages?
Why are you contributing to the discussion? You don't get to join in and then complain, hypocrite.