1-10 seems clearer especially when you get close to 10
1-10 seems clearer especially when you get close to 10
That is a great point. For main reviews, I prefer the 1-10 scale (with half points, if need be) but if you're looking through user reviews to get a common opinion, all those .5s really make it tough to come to any sort of overal conclusion.Originally Posted by Johnny_Rock
Who looks at scores 2 or below on an 'Out of 5' scale? And anyway, a 3/5 sounds better than a 6/10 to me, so I'm more tempted to buy a 3/5 game - which is not good for my wallet!
Great point! More distinction between a 4 out of 5 and an 8 out of 10. 4 out of 5 feels like a 9 out of 10.
GameSpy cheat. They use a 5 star scale with half stars. Thats just a done up ten scale.
I'd be interested in what GRG conversion rate is since he post all his reviews from the blog here on DP which has a 1-10 scale.
For the record I'm a big fan of the 1-5 system. Less is more.
I hadn't seen that. At first, when I read the bit about 5 stars out of 5 not being a sign of perfection... I was nodding my head. But everything he argues in favour of a five star scale you could argue for a ten point scale. 5 out of 5 is the same as 10 out of 10, right?I'd be interested in what GRG conversion rate is since he post all his reviews from the blog here on DP which has a 1-10 scale.
For the record I'm a big fan of the 1-5 system. Less is more.
Maybe an academic score would be better.
A for the best games, B for very good games, C for Average games, and F anything that sucks.
You've got all the bases covered without wasting more than one spot for crap games, and if you need more specificity amongst the worthwhile games, then you can use +/-.
that's pretty much the 5 point scale if you kept the letter D for below average games
The review is what matters, numbered ratings mean little because we all have different tastes. Without actually reading the review (I prefer reading several) you are not getting an acurate depiction of the game. One through five is really enough to get the general idea of what the reviewer was writing towards.
Also when I used to review I got reemed by the editor for using numbers below 6 to often, a simple 1 to 5 scale would have probably avoided much of this.
My argument here is likely well known, as I got into one hell of a shitstorm with Zach about this. Apparently I'm wrong AND I rape children. But hes not around anymore and even if you could find the thread I'm sure he edited all his posts.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.
Anyways, my argument here is this. I prefer the 100 point scale within a certain publication or review site. For example, Bethany Massiwhatevera from Gamespot does most of their RPG reviews, and it makes it real easy to determine that she thought Tales of Legendia is a better RPG experience than Grandia III (8.0 and 7.6 respectively). According to another reviewer within the site, Symphonia scores higher than both of those (8.8). That's simple and easy, and being a huge fan of Symphonia I know both of those games are going to be worth my time, but may not draw me in as hardcore as Symphonia did. But taking those assumptions across multiple sites doesn't make sense, and saying that Tales of Symphonia is better than Star Wars: Empire at War for PC (8.7) is just stupid. If you don't take the numbers out of context they can work.
And to be fair to a site like GameRankings, they really don't have any choice but to rank games on a 100 point scale. Anything else would skew the data too far from some of the reviewers intended views...
And on that note, the numbers mean nothing. If something scores horrendously poorly, I won't bother reading the review. If it's a game I was looking forward I'll read the review regardless of the score, and if it's something I was marginally interested in I'll check it out if it scored well.
scales and grades are arbitrary, there is no specific science behind rating games on a 100 point or even a 10 point scale. the 5 point or letter grade scale works the best, and most games should be in the 2-4 range and 1 or a 5 should be used sparingly. A game is either fun or it isnt, that is really all there is to it.
Well, the scale just adjusts using common sense. A 5 or a 6 would be a *** on Blogcritics. 7-8 would be ****. You can figure it out from there.I'd be interested in what GRG conversion rate is since he post all his reviews from the blog here on DP which has a 1-10 scale.
For the record I'm a big fan of the 1-5 system. Less is more.
I was going to cut and paste the same link since that's where all of my stances are on the topic. Averages don't pan out on a 10-point scale. Ever. Most sites never use the whole scale either. 10s are so rare that there's hardly a point in using them. A five star rating doesn't mean something like "perfection," it just means it's a damned good game.
With that, I'm just repeating myself.
Is it really? So Legendia is .4 times better than Grandia? That's useless to score that way. On a five scale, they both nab themselves a 4. Would you really NOT buy a game because of a .4 gap?real easy to determine that she thought Tales of Legendia is a better RPG experience than Grandia III (8.0 and 7.6 respectively).
Both sides can argue till the cows come home. No matter how you slice it, they both work out in the end. However, I prefer the 10 point scale with half increments.
The 10 point scale allows for more specific ratings. Particularly in mags like EGM, where 3 reviewers can have sometimes heavily varying opinions.
The half increments allow for refining. Say you have a PS2 game that gets an 8, but the same game on the Xbox gets an 8.5 due to graphical upgrades or faster load times.
Small things like that can make a difference, and I say that you can never have too much knowledge on a product before you go buy it.
RIP bargora, you will be greatly missed.That is how we do things on Giedion Prime.
the crap is totally arbitrary, averaging out several arbitrary scores doesnt change that
unless there is a direct gameplay issue, these differences should not be reflected in the score. this should be mentioned in the review and left alone. minor differences by their nature do not affect how much fun a game is to play. if there was a difference in fun factor (lack of online play in a cube version), then it may warrant a full point drop.The half increments allow for refining. Say you have a PS2 game that gets an 8, but the same game on the Xbox gets an 8.5 due to graphical upgrades or faster load times.
therefore you have a contridiction, if you really want all the information available, then read the review, dont rely on a number pulled out of the ass of a reviewer.Small things like that can make a difference, and I say that you can never have too much knowledge on a product before you go buy it.
more refied scales have only led to grade inflation, and have given publications more wiggle room for corrupt practices like IGN giving Madden 05 a .1 higher grade than NFL 2K5. you cant help but think of the possibility of money changing hands.
if you want objectivity, then read the review. numbers are subjective no matter how specific the scale.
i choose the out of 10 - larger range
personaly i like out of 100 - just my preferance
The human operates out of complex superiority demands, self -affirming through ritual, insiting upon a rational need to learn, striving for self-imposed goals, manipulating his environment while he denies his own adaptive abilities, never fully satisfied.
--Frank Herbert
GRG upscales for DP. It is because DP uses a 10 point scale.I'd be interested in what GRG conversion rate is since he post all his reviews from the blog here on DP which has a 1-10 scale.
For the record I'm a big fan of the 1-5 system. Less is more.
5 Star systems upscale to 10 point system just fine.
4/5 = 8/10.
1 Star = 2 points.
As for half stars (an entire point in 10 point scale) that is a gray area.
Ken Edwards
Blogcritics.org Editor
5/5 is not the same as 10/10, not by a long shot. That is the point!I hadn't seen that. At first, when I read the bit about 5 stars out of 5 not being a sign of perfection... I was nodding my head. But everything he argues in favour of a five star scale you could argue for a ten point scale. 5 out of 5 is the same as 10 out of 10, right?I'd be interested in what GRG conversion rate is since he post all his reviews from the blog here on DP which has a 1-10 scale.
For the record I'm a big fan of the 1-5 system. Less is more.
Ken Edwards
Blogcritics.org Editor
Yes it is. 5 is the maximum, just like 10 is the maximum. When you try and compare 5 to 10, they may no longer be the same, but they are attempting the same thing: to represent the highest possible score on that scale. So, 5 out of 5 is the same as 10 out of 10 - the best score on that scale possible.
Yes it is. 5 is the maximum, just like 10 is the maximum. When you try and compare 5 to 10, they may no longer be the same, but they are attempting the same thing: to represent the highest possible score on that scale. So, 5 out of 5 is the same as 10 out of 10 - the best score on that scale possible.
no, they are not
there are a lot of games on a ten point scale that get 9s. the 9 score is overused on a 10 point scale, and its rare for a game to be scored under 5 (which should be in the average range).
the most accurate scale is the three point scale
3 - good
2 - average
1 - poor
a five point scale adds extreme examples on either end of the scale and should used on rare occasions
5 - classic
4 - good
3 - average
2 - poor
1 - omgwtf
i really cant think of any additions needed, hell roger ebert has made a living off of 2x2 scale for decades.
You're taking it way too literally, and apparently you missed the point that both games were reviewed by the same person, within the same publication. There's no way to quantify what any number assigned to a game in any context means. A game isn't ".4 times better" than any other game if it scores that much higher, it simply means that the reviewer enjoyed the one game a little more than the other. The bigger the gap, the bigger the difference in enjoyment. It could be something as menial as shorter load times or a little better voice acting, things you'd figure out by reading the review.
You're doing exactly what I said by taking the numbers out of context. And yes, there definitely are people out there that would not purchase one game because of a difference as insignificant as .4, but those people are tools. You're assuming that anyone who prefers the more detailed rating scales never reads reviews, and thats absurd.
That just sounds like a nightmare to maintain consistancy over an extended period of time. Sure you could compare Legendia and Grandia 3, but how do they rank up to your initial opinions on say Final Fantasy X. Not only has the standard of what you'd expect from a PS2 title shifted in that time, but how are you suppose to juggle FFX in relationship to Okage to Suikoden III, to Phantom Brave, to ect. Somewhere along the line the point decimal comparisons just aren't going to match up. You'd have to reevaluate every score you've ever assigned every time you write up a review for a new game.
It's impractical.
5 point scores are neat, easy to interpret, and easy to compare. Chances are a good game isn't going to jump to an outstanding game over the course of two years. If you're being objective you should only be looking at the product you're rating, not subjectively comparing it to another title that you might have enjoyed maginally more.
what is absurd is trying to quantify fun to tenths of a degree. its totally subjective. these numbers are pulled out of a reviewers ass.
if you read the reviews on specific points, why do you need a score to reflect them?
i wouldnt be so against the practice if there were at least definiative rules on scoring... but there arent, and there is no good way of making any
Posting Permissions
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Similar agreements apply to other advertising or affiliate programs such as those from eBay, Google, etc.
Copyright © 1991 - Present of Digital Press. All rights reserved.
Reply With Quote
