Topher
Gold Member
They could always use half a star. 3.5 = 70. Either way, this is more effective than a 10 point system where half the scale is ever used.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Eurogamer is moving to a five-star review rating system, beginning this week (starting with Zelda Tears of the Kingdom).
- Thread starter fermcr
- Start date
They could always use half a star. 3.5 = 70. Either way, this is more effective than a 10 point system where half the scale is ever used.
The granularity of a 10 point score system or the godawful 100 was always kind of fake and in reality not distinguishable. It's hard to find words for the difference between 6 and 7 points, or 8 and 9, basically any n+1 difference.
On a scale to five however arguments being made for a score over another is most likely more transparent and comprehensible.
On a scale to five however arguments being made for a score over another is most likely more transparent and comprehensible.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Zelda 5/5 incoming
Hitchyhero
Banned
I much prefer the out of 10 system IF it was used properly.
5/10 should be an average game
7/10 should be good
9/10 should be near perfect.
Instead it's
5/10 is terrible (meaning 1-4 is no worse)
7/10 is not good
9/10 is it's a very good game
5/10 should be an average game
7/10 should be good
9/10 should be near perfect.
Instead it's
5/10 is terrible (meaning 1-4 is no worse)
7/10 is not good
9/10 is it's a very good game
Ev1L AuRoN
Member
So, no half stars? That is just they being spineless. A lot of games will be bundle on the 4/5 ratting, being anywhere between 80~90. Not that I care too much, metacritic and other scores are only fun to see the fanboys warring. I choose my games based on the feedback of other fellow players or by gameplay footage online.
This is beautiful.I dug up an old reddit post to explain why a 5 star system makes sense. A reddit user mapped the distribution of all review scores on metacritic around 4 years ago. The graph is below.
If you ditch the outliers(a game below 50 is considered bad in game reviews), games are roughly scored on a 5 point scale centered somewhere in the 70s. A 5 point scale where three is average is much more intuitive than arbitrary point increments.
Yet, people here are still arguing in favor of a 10-point scale.
Copied my own post from the Gamespot 6/10 thread:
"The 10-point scale had always been dumb. What can be said on a 10-point scale that can't be said on a 5-point scale? Broken, Bad, Okay, Great, Excellent. That's really all you need.
Personally, I keep track of every game I finish. Only the games that I actually finish. Once I finish a game, I give it a rating of 1-4, based on a rubric that I created. 4, because I won't finish a game that I consider broken.
4 - One of the best games I've ever played. Fun throughout with few moments of boredom, no control issues, very few visual/audio issues.
3 - An all-time great that just doesn't reach the highs of a 4. Maybe it's too long or has a boring segment. Maybe the graphics aren't polished or the controls could be better.
2 - An all-around decent game that is somewhere between actively fun and boring. Possibly has a fair number of glitches or other annoying issues.
1 - Almost a bad game. Tedious to play, low production value, etc... But has just enough redeeming qualities for me to finish it."
StereoVsn
Member
It's almost 40 years and we have first hand witnesses out of Brooklyn, NYC who can help bring him to justice!
Your metric is roughly how I imagine a score system should work. Personally, I kept a list of every game I played for years organized in order of how much I liked them. The process starts with a symbolic "is this game better than Crazy Taxi" and concludes with me splitting the list until I find its spot.
anthraticus
Banned
Another SJW site
Why not make it a 1,000-point scale? 100 times the precision!
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
The idea of a score is to give as brief and succinct a summary as possible for people without the desire or ability to digest a written review. The logical endpoint of which is the Siskel/Ebert thumbs up or down model. The next step up is enshrining a low, mid, high spectrum which can be expressed alternatively as "buy", "don't buy", and "wait for sale"
Anything beyond that is just degrees of redundancy in a functional sense. Its just a presentational gimmick.
At the end of the day precision is meaningless, because the nuances of the reasoning behind giving whatever score are absent. 94 is less good than a 95 but when those numbers are put in by different reviewers each with their own subjective tastes and take, how is that in any way meaningful or helpful to the reader?
Short answer: It isn't.
You might as well call anything between 90 and 99, a 9/10, or a 4 1/2 stars out of 5, because it is the exact same thing!
Its basically why I kinda chuckle at people bemoaning review scores mostly using only a portion of the scale available to them, the phenomenon where a 5/10 is basically the lowest you tend to see. If that's your belief then just treat 5 as a floor for "not recommended", and make your judgement based on the remainder!
The numbers don't matter; the only instructive thing is the position across the scale or the most generally useful portion thereof.
Nocturno999
Member
And they magically did it on new Zelda's launch and proceed to flop it. You simply can't take these sites seriously.
GHG
Member
They wanted the clicks and attention clearly.
This is what a numbered scoring will get them. It's deliberate.
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
Tsaki
Member
8/10 is a flop... If they wanted the controversy they'd give it a 3/5. The simple answer is that for Eurogamer TotK is a 8/10 game. Don't look much into it.
Wow 4 out of 5. The horror.Well, how about that. They give it 4/5.
Simply Sami
Member
Lost respect for them when they decided to refuse to review Hogwarts. Sites gone downhill, their failed sub attempt and now this.
XXL
Member
4 out of 5 in no world is a flop.
I haven't actually read the review, which is the most important part and way more than the number.
But, 4 out of 5 is a great score for any game.
diffusionx
Gold Member
The truth is the five star system really is the best system.
5 = Must Play
4 = Excellent
3 = Good
2 = Probably skip it
1 = definitely skip it
Any granularity can be outlined in the review.
5 = Must Play
4 = Excellent
3 = Good
2 = Probably skip it
1 = definitely skip it
Any granularity can be outlined in the review.
Portugeezer
Member
RJMacready73
Simps for Amouranth
so what score are they gonna give Hogwarts? fuck em
Going back to a rating system is the right move.
A meaningful apology to the broader gaming community would probably be the best move they could make though. Stars or no stars, I still consider them more interested in passing judgment on people than games, and find their opinions to be meaningless in the context of video games.
A meaningful apology to the broader gaming community would probably be the best move they could make though. Stars or no stars, I still consider them more interested in passing judgment on people than games, and find their opinions to be meaningless in the context of video games.
Disco Dave
Member
R6Rider
Gold Member
Exactly.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Best rating is no rating. Write what you thought about the game and let readers decide for themselves after reading about the game.
Not going right to a score and deciding based on that.
Not going right to a score and deciding based on that.
Walter Matthau
Member
It's no coincidence that Eurogamer chose to start using this scoring system with Zelda. The 5 point rating scale maximizes traffic to the site by creating outliers on MC.
You can describe a 4/5 game as "incredible" in a review while still justifying the rating by pointing out a small flaw or two. Without the nuance of a 10 or 100 point scale, you evade clickbait accusations because there are no "perfect" games.
Random game that gets a lot things right, but is super short and has some bugs.. not outlandish to give it a 5/5, but that "100%" will go right to the top of MC and get all the clicks.
High profile game that executes on everything well, but doesn't necessarily break new ground.. how about an "average" 3/5.
Mildly disappointing, 2/5.
Despite my accusation, I actually prefer the 5 point scale or even no score at all. It would just be better for aggregation purposes if there was an industry wide standard for scoring games.
You can describe a 4/5 game as "incredible" in a review while still justifying the rating by pointing out a small flaw or two. Without the nuance of a 10 or 100 point scale, you evade clickbait accusations because there are no "perfect" games.
Random game that gets a lot things right, but is super short and has some bugs.. not outlandish to give it a 5/5, but that "100%" will go right to the top of MC and get all the clicks.
High profile game that executes on everything well, but doesn't necessarily break new ground.. how about an "average" 3/5.
Mildly disappointing, 2/5.
Despite my accusation, I actually prefer the 5 point scale or even no score at all. It would just be better for aggregation purposes if there was an industry wide standard for scoring games.
March Climber
Member
That's just star ratings with emojis attached.They should use the old Gamepro System
Mozza
Member
You are correct, funny how those faces make you forget that obcene rating system.
TheInfamousKira
Reseterror Resettler
Okay, guys, check it:
E.T.- Bury these games
Craig - game sucks, but there is no need to be upset.
Green Rat - Mid
Abby Anderson - FORE
Kamiya- this game is so good, I'm blocking you until I finish.
Perfect GAF rating system.
E.T.- Bury these games
Craig - game sucks, but there is no need to be upset.
Green Rat - Mid
Abby Anderson - FORE
Kamiya- this game is so good, I'm blocking you until I finish.
Perfect GAF rating system.
KormaChameleon
Member
I prefer my score system. It's simple. No nonsense.
Buy
Wait for sale
Avoid
Buy
Wait for sale
Avoid
TransTrender
Gold Member
Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom review - Hyrule reborn bigger and busier
Eurogamer's review of The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom for Nintendo Switch.
www.eurogamer.net
Eurogamer has become unbearable lately, what’s with all the woke shit? Oh and a 5 point system is shit.
Edit: case in point, Eurogamer raising funds for Mermaids, a charity under investigation by the charity commission. Why a videogame site is associated with a charity whose aim is to mutilate kids I will never know.
Team's Team Eurogamer getting Magical for Mermaids!
Help Team Eurogamer raise money to support Mermaidswww.justgiving.com
I and many others were banned from their forum for the high crime of asking where the Hogwarts review was. Virtue signalling is the order of the day, not actual principles that matter. If they had principles they'd boycott EA and Nintendo since Saudi Arabia is a major stakeholder in both and has a terrible LGBTQ record but they won't.
And that aside yeah they've gone massively downhill in recent times with the quantity and quality of reviews noticeably declining. The only bright spot is the Digital Foundry but the rest.. meh.
Similar threads
- Poll