Which Review Scale is Better 'Out of 5' or 'Out of 10'

[njiska]

A simple question, which review system is better for games?

Something out of 5 or Something out of 10.

I tend to think 'Out of 5' works better because it's more informative.

5 - Great
4 - Above Average
3 - Average
2- Below Average
1 - Crap

Afterall who looks at a game below 5 on an 'Out of 10' scale?

[Johnny_Rock]

1 to 5


The worst is when they do 1 to 10 but ad half-points because you get alot of this guy give it a 8 and this guy gives it an 8.5

[Half Japanese]

I don't mind either really. What I find really pretentious are reviewers that give scores like '7.2' or '5.1' or shit like that. 1-5 or 1-10, and half points variations only.

[meancode]

Oh man don't get me started on this! I am also sure Gamereviewgod will chime in here too.

Out of 5 system is a lot better. It is a REAL shame that GameRankings.com thinks otherwise.

But they can go to hell with their 100 point system.

You bring up an *excellent* point Njiska! Who does look at a game score under 5 on a 10 point system?

But I will look at a 2 or even a 1 out of 5 just to see why it got something that low.

[meancode]

No half point varients!

What is a 3.5/5 got that a 3/5 doesn't? And if you think it should have a 3.5/5, then you might give it a 4/5 unless it truely is a 3/5 game.

Half points do make more sense on a 10 point scale, and for that scale I agree with the half points only, and not the 7.3 crap.

[njiska]

Oh man don't get me started on this! I am also sure Gamereviewgod will chime in here too.

Getting GRG's response is half the reason i posted this.

I think you can do Have points on a 5 scale better then you can on a 10. After all 4.5 stars and 3.5 stars is pretty common.

Just like a B+, it's just slight better then the soild number.

[meancode]

My money is on a rant from GRG about the 7/10 score.

Any takers?

[pacmanhat]

I prefer the 1-10 scale. It's just the way I've always been presented with this sort of thing...you could say it's what I'm used to. And I'm not sure that I understand the argument about not looking at a game that scores less than 5 out of 10. If it's that bad, I don't see why you would want to look at it anyway, regardless of the scale on which it's graded.

[keiblerfan69]

I like out of 10. It just seems much more fair. Like a game that isn't perfect can get a a 9 instead of a 4.

[pragmatic insanester]

1 out of 10. more room for variety. there's a notable difference between a weak but enjoyable 6/10, a "must love the subject matter" 5/10, and a "there might be a good section or two in here" 4/10.

[meancode]

Here is something that Gamereviewgod wrote for BC. It is what we go by.

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/11/29/234339.php

I might be a little biased, but I could not agree more.

[kedawa]

If I have to choose from only those options, then I think a true ten point system is best (i.e.. no decimals), whether it be a 5 star system with half stars, or just an out of 10.

I think there are far more important aspects of a scoring system, however, like weighing the importance of graphics and sound, whether or not to knock a sequel down a point for being only as good as its predecessor, rather than an improvement, or whether or not to revisit and adjust old scores over time to keep them relevant.

[DonMarco]

A collection of thoughts:

If I ever did a score system, it wouldn't be based on numbers or letters.

The 1-10 system is metric-y. The 1-5 system is more kiddy.

Was it PSM that did the little charts that had the game's score over a period of time, with it decreasing or increasing? I think it was.

"ProTip" should be in the dictionary.

[RCM]

I'm totally against review scales. If people measure the quality of a title by a certain amount of stars, thumbs up, etc. what's the point of writing the review?

"It has 5 stars so I know it's great!" Spare me.

[Anexanhume]

I actually like out of 100. I feel like it makes the reviewer be more meticulous about his or her reasoning.

[poopnes]

Well I personally like "out of 10", with average being a 5. I also believe if you're going to use any rating scale use all of it! I hate Game Informer's reviews because anything under 7 is below average. Why is there a need for 6 points of crap? So yea I like EGM's reviewing scale where a 5 is average a 1 is shit and 10 is the cream of the crop. I also hate when magazines are afraid to use "1" and "10". I don't want to see a game every month get one, but there's times when they could and should be used. There is no perfect game but there are some that are close and are instant classics. Why shouldn't they get that "perfect" 10?

[Richter Belmount]

10 out of 10 kinda makes a little more specific.

[Skyone]

10 out of 10.

4.5 out of 5 just sounds ghey.

[njiska]

10 out of 10 kinda makes a little more specific.

Does it really? How does one define an 8.5 from an 8? or even an 8 from a 7. The problem with the ten point system is that it allows for too much variation.

The 5 point system is exact because every score has a comparable ranking. With the 10 point scale you run into 7 'being better then average' and 8 being 'better then better then average, but not great'. See with the 10 point system things get convoluded.

[Julio III]

Whenever I rank things I always rank them out of 5 stars. Pretty much because I can't really rank things with more deviation than that. Out of 10 there is just too many numbers to think about. Out of 5 is simple and easy and I can easily say, thats a 2 star film or thats a 4 star game. It has easy meaning and is pretty much across the board where out of 10 is abused as stated because people don't use the full range whereas they do out of 5.