What's up with Reviews today?
A Review of current Game Review systems
Demigod Forums
As most gamers do in todays gaming environment, I almost always research and investigate most titles before laying down my money for a new game. Frankly I don't have as much money or free time as I used to and want to make sure I get some bang for my buck. I tend to watch as much gameplay footage as possible, hit the forums and read a few reviews. Now-a-days, however, Reviews - particularly from the bigger publications and websites - aren't as honest or as trustworthy as they used to be. Most big releases receive questionable scores in hindsight, often never lower than 8 when in hindsight it should've been a 6, and often a popular series' latest instalment is rated higher than superior-but-lesser-known titles. Some games receive the covetted 10/10, and in two months time the internet is filled with the general consensus that the game is utter crap. What happened?
Reviewers often give conflicting scores to their written opinions - the review will be cite tales of utter and extreme frustration and boredom, or how simply unfun playing the game is, and then drop an 8.5 at the end as if they're trying to dodge a bullet, with 8.5 being considered neither great nor bad. A new title, similar to a popular series but with improvements and new ideas will emerge and be given a 6/10 and insulted for being too similar. Then the next installment in the popular series - which is exactly the same as previous entries, now with slightly flashier graphics - will receive a 9 or a 10. Why the double standards?
Anyway, I think the current review system no longer serve the general public's needs. Most gamers want to know one thing: is it worth the asking price! The 5 Star system is the best current system as it's concise and simple, however it's often scrapped or used only in film. In its place we get the 10/10 system or the 100 point scale. Each have their benefits. The 5 Star system forces the reviewer to rate the game into one of five levels. The major problem is that there isn't really a lot of difference between a 1 star game and a 2 star game; no one really wants to play them and so most games either get a 1 star or a 4 star, and then some people like to use half-stars, creating a basic 10/10 system. The 10/10 system is better as it gives more ratings and thus allows for greater reviewer detail however, again, the difference between a 4/10 and a 5/10 is moot; most people won't play them. Furthermore, most reviewer systems like to use decimal scores, such 9.2, defeating the purpose of the 10/10 system as it becomes a 100 point scale. Now, the 100 point scale is fantastic as it gives a lot of room for really intricate and detailed reviews... however in order to justify the difference between an 66 and a 67, the review needs to be more detailed than most people care to read. Instead of one or two page reviews, a 100 point scale really needs a small thesis about the game to justify such a massive scale. We also see that around 70/80 is the cut off point for most gamers; if a game scores a 69 or lower most people won't care to play it unless they were already going to play it before the review.
Personaly, I think we need a new system that reflects the basic question - a Three Star system, so people instantly get the info they want: is the game worth my money. One star simply means it's a bad game and isn't worth playing. I feel getting a game finished and out there to buy is worth one star at least for the effort. Two stars means its either worth renting to play through it or you should buy it if its really cheap, because its good but not worth the purchase price. Three stars means its a great game and worth your money. This forces reviewers to be decisive - is it worth it not? Instead of bickering over 8.9s and 9.1s, people would simply get the info they want.
What do you guys think? 3 Stars, 5 Stars, 10/10, or 100 points?
Stardock Forums
Elemental Forums
Sins Forums